What New Media Can Learn From Old Media

There's been some talk lately about the differences about how the New Media and the Old Media operate and how the Old Media better get on the stick.

In case you hadn't noticed, I am Old Media with a capital O. Proud of it, actually.

And yes, we do operate differently than some in the New Media and I again underline some.

Here's one way: Old Media makes its share of mistakes, but not if we can help it. We still call people involved in a story to get their side; editors fact check; and we never publish or broadcast anything unless we think it's true.

Last week, we saw what can happen when it's done the other way.

A partisan blogger with an agenda - not a journalist - put the heavily edited, totally out of context, now infamous sound bite of Shirley Sherrod on the Internet. Some of the cable folk picked up the story, and demanded the woman's ouster.

No calls to those involved, no checking of any kind - just throw it out there and leave it to the woman to defend herself.

Even worse, an administration so anxious to wash its hands of the controversy before the evening news came on didn't check, either, and fired her.

You know the rest of it, including all the apologies.

I know the Old Media can always learn a thing or two from the New Media, and I sure don't want to lecture the young folks - even the older ones masquerading as New Media.

But hey, if you would just make a call every once in a while to check these things out before you put it on the web, you could save all of us a lot of trouble.

[magnumdr]

I can tell you what all media can learn. Not to put so much interest into a story that gets attention to bad things. like the guy that want's to burn the book. just shut him down and nobody would even know about what this foolish guy is going to do!

[babooph]

New & old will grovel to central propaganda control -no real difference...

[OfMoreInterest]

All news is politicized these days. While most folks are somewhat aware of this, they will still choose to watch/hear what they like as opposed to giving some time to the "opposing view" occasionally. The danger is the power the media then has to significantly shape the thinking of the hoi polloi.

I believe the media has a responsibility to report news as dispassionately as possible...leave politicking to the commentary showmen.

Case in point, Bob Schieffer this morning. In a passing remark about the danger of the internet, Bob talks about nutcases...mostly from the right...who are apparently still saying Barack is a Muslim.

Bob, if you wanted to discuss the DANGERS of the internet, why not expand your oh-too-brief mention of "perverts"...

Child pornography - now THAT'S dangerous.

Or let's explore the fact that people can, via the internet, get involved in terrorist organizations - now THAT'S dangerous.

Instead you chose to politicize what might've been a meaningful comment.

Now I understand you're a commentary showman, Bob...but nutcases (abundant across all political boundaries, even you'd have to admit), on the internet are engaging in some TRULY dangerous stuff...whether or not Barack is a Muslim is old "news", not "growing", and certainly NOT dangerous.

[6591Hou]

The problem with the media, particularly with the 24 hour cycle sound-bite media, is what is left out of a story can be more important than what was left in.
Editing is the easiest way for a media organization to craft a slanted story to favor whatever they choose.

[OhPleeeze]

Schieffer Says: Hey, It Wouldn't Kill You to Fact Check Things Once in a While....

Yes Mr. Schieffer. You are correct, Sir. I wonder why you do not take own advice. OR, is it that you are trying to mislead your audience.
The tape was not "heavily edited" as you have said several times. The tape was an excerpt and more importantly it included Ms. Sherrod's redemptive revelation: ?I opened my eyes. I realized it wasn?t about black and white. It was, but it was about other things, about poverty.?
Oh please, get off your high horse and do some honest reporting.

[tsigili]

Journalistic integrity, is a thing of the past. Today's "news" has really just become another "entertainment" format, and the reliability of its content, is of little importance, as long as the attention getting qualities are there.

[voxpopulus]

The worst thing about the new media is that it gives equal space to anyone with an opinion, even if they don't have a brain, and - as they say - opinions are like anuses.

[aghast101]

You are talking about ABC, NBC, CBS aren't you?

[_One_American____]

How bloody ironic.

An individual that claims the moniker "voxpopulus" (or voice of the people) has a problem with free speech.

See the hipocricy of the Liberal mind on display?

[voxpopulus]

I don't have a problem with free speech. I have a problem with dumb speech having equal prominence on news pages. And being unable to spell "hypocrisy" hardly wins your point.

I have nothing against these websites allowing feedback, as my own website does, and I contribute to it, but such sites as BBC and even TMZ, which tuck it away unless you actually make an effort to open it or go there, do it better.

Whether the name "Obama" or "Palin" is in the article, the sludge at the bottom of the page, too often from the functionally brain dead and virtually illiterate, gets too predictable.

[_One_American____]

voxpopulus:

Being my little spellchecker hardly wins you any points.
But if you feel better attacking a typo than making any substantial challenge to my point of your hypocricy, go ahead.

Your website must be a hoot.

[_One_American____]

As his excuse for not knowing about the New Black Panther's voter rights suppression story was that he was "on vacation" - Bob Schieffer will need to go on a permanent vacation - so he can have a water-tight alibi for being perpetually ignorant of the truth.

[_One_American____]

uubrew12, after running out of original thoughts, is reduced to name-calling.

Sad and pathetic, but mostly pathetic.

Must be a Bob Schieffer fan - or works with him.

I struck a nerve - but not a brain cell.

[_One_American____]

uubrew12, after running out of original thoughts, is reduced to name-calling.

Sad and pathetic, but mostly pathetic.

Must be a Bob Schieffer fan - or works with him.

I struck a nerve - but not a brain cell.

[_One_American____]

As his excuse for not knowing about the New Black Panther's voter rights suppression story was that he was "on vacation" - Bob Schieffer will need to go on a permanent vacation - so he can have a water-tight alibi for being perpetually ignorant of the truth.

[forparity]

Schieffer: "We still call people involved in a story to get their side; editors fact check; and we never publish or broadcast anything unless we think it's true."

Really. In regards to the "Kill the bill" protest, in which you ran the unsubstaniated stories of the protestors spitting on the congressman, and, "hurling racial epethats at Rep. Lewis," we can be assured that you fact checked, you called people on both sides to make sure that you got their side of the story, and your editors poured over the numerous video tapes to confirm that what was claimed was said (noting that they said some said the "n" word 15 times), and you found what nobody else has been able to fine - yet you went to air with your comments anyway?

Then, when you found out that the claims made were not holding up to scrutny, you issued a retraction and an apology to those wronged.

The good ole fashioned way, right?