News is what you think it is.

Today, with access to unprecedented amounts of information on the Internet – including millions of blogs, comments, traditional news sites, reviews, press releases, videos, and conversations on social networks - people are choosing how and when they are receiving their information. But, more importantly, they’re choosing “what” information they want.

This is what we call news.  

It’s that simple: News is what we think it is. Just like brands are shaped by consumer perceptions, reputations are built by recommendations from friends and peers, and expert labels are earned by professional colleagues, news is defined by what we think is important. And on the Social Web today, this is gauged through our participation in telling stories and determined by our willingness to share information.

Ironically, it has been this way throughout history. For a time, however, when traditional mass media was the fastest method to share information, news was packaged for easier distribution and consumption. It may or may not have been what we considered news, but it was – at the time – the fastest way of getting “new information.” And when pieces of information somehow dripped outside of the packaged news story, it was often called a leak. Not surprisingly, though, the leaks were stories that had audiences too. Quite often leaks also became very popular “news” stories. So today, you can think of the Internet as a virtual news sieve…with leaks all over the place, each one with its own relevant audience.

Whether it’s leaking information or telling stories, we all play an important role in creating and disseminating news. And that can mean anything from stimulating global conversation to actively sharing bits of highly relevant information with members of our community. 

Welcome to the Social Web — where every visitor, reader, and contributor is also a reporter.

Many of you visit Diablogue from outside of the USA. Welcome and thank you.

Diablogue Visitors by Country

I’ve noticed lately that many of you arrived here via search on this topic: “What is News?”

Awhile ago I posed this question as I tried to decide whether or not to return to Journalism school. However, the question carries larger implications about how we define “news” and how we receive our news – not just here in the USA, but around the globe. Mostly thanks to the Internet.

• How is news defined in your country?
• What is your personal definition of news?
• Do you participate in defining or reporting news in your country?

Please feel free to share your thoughts.

Image Source: www.sitemeter.com

: : : : : : : : : : :

Many moons ago – when I attended SUNY Brockport as a journalism student – I learned that news was timely and relevant. News was written to include the 5Ws in the first ‘graph and it was also supposed to be:

Objective.  Sterile.  Unbiased.  Fair.  Balanced.  Factual.  Accurate. 

Flash forward to 2008 – I am thinking about going back to school for my Master’s degree in Journalism. My choices include either a Magazine or News Editorial focus. The former is pretty clear. The latter? It made me wonder what our definition of “news” is these days. So, I went out to the blogosphere to inquire.

Here’s what Howard Owens said (reprinted verbatim, as it is both pithy and poignant):

“For thousands of years, news was reported in a personal fashion — via campfire or troubadour. The printing press enabled the rise of mass media and process of reporting news from one to many. The Internet enables a return to one-to-one, personal journalism. We can now report news in the same way we did when it was over a campfire — complete with nuance, context and personal insight.

Mass media needed “objective journalism” because news was reported one to many, so it had to be generic and meet the needs of a highly differentiated audience.

Today, all news is one-to-one. It can be personal, because if you or I disagree with that personal POV, we have the means to respond, question, and provide our own facts or commentary.

Modern news will win/succeed because it returns us to our roots, our DNA, our way of being — the way we most naturally like to communicate — in a personal voice.“

To put it mildly, Howard’s response was an eye opener. I always thought about news as it was defined for me in college!  I’m also surprised and dismayed at how tightly I held on to that definition all these years. With his added perspective, I already feel better equipped to make my decision about school. However, I still have questions and curiosities, mostly about objectivity in news reporting:

• Do you think there’s value in news that is based solely on objective, just-the-facts-ma’am reporting?
• And how do you determine what news is “credible?” Is it based on the degree of objectivity or how well you know (or how well you think you know) the person?
• Is it even possible for a reporter – a human being with feelings and preconceived notions – to be truly unbiased?
• What’s more important – the story (the facts) or how it’s packaged (how it is told)? Or does this depend on the receiver (ie, right brained or left brained individuals)?

What do you think?

RECOMMENDED READING:

• Five W’s and a H that should come *after* every story (A model for the 21st century newsroom: pt3)
• News of Future – future news for year 2020 and beyond
• News Should Be Neither Fair Nor Balanced
• What is News? (February 2009)

: : : : : : : : : : :