If You Post It...They Will Come

photo courtesy of websiteexpert.com

There are many new media tools to use to reach a variety of audiences, from creating a simple blog post to creating an elaborate YouTube video. But based on the types of information I plan to share with the world--communication trends, publishing, digital media news, news of interest to freelance writers and editors-- there are three that I think will best reach the audience who will use the information.

LinkedIn is a professional networking site where users connect with their industry peers, school classmates, and others who have common professional interests. There are variety of groups on LinkedIn that are career- and interest-specific. For instance, I belong to a group of grammarians who enjoy posting questions they encounter in their work, such as "Does a comma always come after the 'which'?" Joining a group of new media freelancers is a great way for me to learn more about what they do, in addition to possibly learning new skills to incorporate into my own work. These types of groups would make for a good audience to review and critique information I post related to grammar and editing issues.

 Twitter is another good channel to communicate my ideas on the field of communication and new media. I am connecting to groups of freelancers and journalists who may find it useful to share with others, or simply provide feedback on the accuracy and relevance of my findings. I can publish my work to the web and share the link with my followers. Who knows, if its an interesting read, perhaps I may add a few followers to my small but growing Twitter family.

Musings of an Editor,Writer, and Storyteller is a blog I started a few years ago that, unfortunately, I've allowed to languish without my consistent musings. I don't have many followers on this blog, but my communication and publishing content would have a great home alongside some of the other content I've posted through the years. I've in the process of rebranding myself by only posting content to social media that involves my work as a writer and editor, my educational pursuits, and information that will cultivate a network of communication professionals.

The Offensive Parade Float: A Discussion of Unrestricted Web Publishing

An Independence Day Float in Norfolk, Nebraska, angered some residents and is gaining attention on social media. It depicted President Obama's Presidential Library as an outhouse. In The Huffington Post article 'July 4 Parade Features Obama Presidential Library Outhouse Float,' describes the negative reactions of some Norfolk citizens and actions taken by the Nebraska Democratic Committee.

In this post I'll discuss the credibility of the article's author, Mollie Reilly, and the article's source using the Criteria to Evaluate the Credibility of Web Resources.

Mollie Reilly is the Deputy Politics Editor at the Huffington Post, a reputable online news publication, and has been formally trained in both English and political science from Colgate University. She has interned at news organizations and worked her way up the chain of political reporting. Her background qualifies her to report on the article, which deals with the division between Obama's supporters and his opponents, and the arguments of racism vs. free speech. She has authored hundreds of articles on political subject matter for the Huffington Post dating back to September 2011.


Photo courtesy of The Gazette

The article's tone does not appear to be biased, Ms. Reilly merely states the facts that the float did appear in this year's Independence Day Parade; some residents were angered, including a resident of Kenyan descent who wrote to the mayor to complain; while others were not, including a parade committee member who defended the float and compared it to a political cartoon. Ms. Reilly covered both sides of the controversy and offered no indication of her opinion of the matter.

The article cites the following sources: an Omaha World Herald article and a Lincoln Journal Star, both are online publications (news and journalistic site) that cover news stories of Nebraska. The authors of both articles are staff writers who cover a variety of topics for the publication, not just political news. These sources also pass the credibility checklist.

In reviewing the three articles I saw how they differed in the author's storytelling. Ms. Reilly's article didn't offer much emotion, simply stating the facts; however, the other authors, Hunter Woodall and Mara Klecker, offered vivid detail of the scenery of the parade route, the cheers of the residents, and the reaction of Glory, the Kenyan immigrant who said she and her daughter were frightened by what they saw. Both articles delved into Glory's feelings and her feelings of the racial undertones of the float. Though these articles spurred emotion, I still believe they were unbiased because they offered as much time to those officials who were not offended and defended the float.

An impact of unrestricted web publishing through mass media is that it allows for varying view points of the same topic. Where Ms. Reilly's article only touched briefly on Glory and her reaction, Mr. Woodall and Ms. Klecker's article allowed us a glimpse into why Glory was so frightened, which has roots in her upbringing. By reviewing these additional sources I feel I was told a more complete story. One that might not have been possible with just one. Unrestricted publishing shows us that the same story can be told from different angles, all while remaining accurate and unbiased.

Social Media: The Digital Educator

When I'm asked to answer how I know what I know, my first thoughts go back to the textbooks I read in school, the lessons my mother taught me, the news programs I watched on tv, and just observing everything around me. But today the new things I learn come mostly from online sources, such as news sites and blogs. While I have Twitter, I'm not connected to it often enough to receive breaking news. I do visit CNN throughout the day and I'd say that's where I receive most of my news information. I also visit Huffington Post. The problem with "reputable" sites like CNN and Huffington is that they are slower to break news due to microblogs like Twitter and Instagram. People who are more closely connected to the source are able to release information through social media and generate buzz before the major networks have had time to verify the information. Before social media we didn't realize the amount of time it takes to verify the important details. Thanks to amateur journalists, we receive information as its happening, the details we want without having to wait.

Yesterday I learned that actor Meshac Taylor passed away. He is most known for playing 'Anthony' on the late 80s/early 90s show Designing Women. I learned of his passing on a celebrity gossip board called Lipstickalley. The person who posted didn't list a source, only stating that he was on his death bed and was near death. The poster didn't say his or her relationship to Mr. Taylor or why we should believe the information. I went to CNN, which serves as a verifyer for me, but there was nothing there. This didn't surprise me because Meshac Taylor isn't considered A-list or is very well known. An advantage of social media, is that the forgotten stars whose deaths don't make it to mainstream media will have a more honorable memorial through social media outlets. Today the news of his passing was confirmed by his son via a tweet. The tweet was posted on Lipstickalley. Only with this confirmation did CNN pick up the story. It was validated. But I knew about it yesterday.

At times social media sites are very credible for obtaining information, though most of us will wait to verify it on a news site that has earned a reputation for credibility.

Let's look at TMZ for instance. This site had a bad reputation prior to the 2009 death of Michael Jackson. But when TMZ broke the news of his death (http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=7938705) prior to all the other mainstream outlets, the site gained credibility for its investigative reporting. So now, people actually verify their information through TMZ because they proved themselves.

New Media's Influence

According to NewMedia.org, "most technologies described as "new media" are digital, often having characteristics of being manipulated, networkable, dense, compressible, and interactive, with examples that include the Internet, websites, computer multimedia, computer games, CD-ROMS, and DVDs. New media does not include television programs, feature films, magazines, books, or paper-based publications – unless they contain technologies that enable digital interactivity."

Social media isn't specified, but I think it's capabilities are what I think many people think of when they hear the term "new media." I use new media on a daily basis to perform my work and for personal use. From online meetings and instant messaging, to using my smartphone to send the occasional tweet, to interacting with others on my favorite celebrity gossip messageboard, I find many uses for digital technologies.

Today many people receive their news via social media. When an event, such as a natural disaster occurs, people who are affected by it can take to social media to provide their first hand accounts of the story. The advantage for them is that they don't have to worry about backlash from not verifying information, they can upload a photo or video or tweet for the rest of the world.

But there are negative consequences. Yes, we get an eyewitness account, but what happens when that account differs from someone else's? Which one is true? This is a negative aspect of amateur journalism via social media.

And then what about the media's responsibility to provide truth in reporting? When competing with information on social media involving a breaking news event, news organizations face a dilemma with being one of the first to report on an event, with potentially unverified information, or being late to report but with accurate information that a competitor has already reported.