Is open news quality news?
Meikle reading: paragraph 18
“Open publishing means that the process of creating news is transparent to the readers. They can contribute a story and see it instantly appear in the pool of stories publicly available” (Arnison, 2001 in Meikle, paragraph 17). Therefore open news is news which has been created using open publishing.
Due to the nature of how open news stories are put together, I don’t think that open news is quality news. If anybody can fact check, spell / grammar check or take any part in the editorial process then the news article will end up being altered many times. I think that many alterations, by different people takes away any quality the story ever had. It becomes unreliable if open publishing is used and therefore lacks value.
One issue that Meikle brought up about Indymedia’s use of open news was “the large number of items being posted to sites, which meant that even especially well-researched or significant stories would be replaced quickly on the front page”. If the important news is constantly being replaced, I think it can indicate that the story wasn’t that worthwhile in the first place.
Another issue which Meikle mentioned, also about Indymedia, is that open publishing sites are inundated with spam. I personally think that this factor of spam defiantly takes away any sign of quality within a news story; seeing an article covered in spam can make you question the reliability of the site and quality of the news.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment