Maybe I should not be surprised any longer but yet I never seem to fall off my chair when I read stories like this. Some embrace change and find a way to make it work and some will keep fighting.

It is a very interesting dichotomy between the Times/Post and BBC. One that we see yet again in the corporate world as well. I am a fierce advocate of Transparency and I truly believe that its practice especially in a social media world will bring good things to the economy. Feel free to check out my article on the subject — Social Media New Order: Be Nice, Be True

http://bit.ly/dhaI4n

Thanks!

Carole-Ann Matignon
http://Twitter.com/CMatignon

Clay Shirky makes the case that you can’t put the genie back in the bottle. That we are better off when journalists are accountable to all those voices. While I agree with that, I think the inherent crisis is when all voices appear equal, as in a social media context.

What are the implications for accountability when journalists risk being influenced by unidentified consumers and advertisers in the social media world.

All voices don’t have the same intent. Writers, audience, advertisers all have something to say that’s important, but different. A framework that establishes context for each, distinguishing one role from another is needed for true transparency. I think this is achieved by framework inherent in a functioning community. Communities organize individuals by the roles they contribute to the common good.

In my opinion, in a marketplace of abundant choices, where all voices are equal, community is scarce.

Media companies like WaPo, NYT, local newspapers can improve media value by offering a community structure where members are transparent about their role and make a commitment to sustaining the common good.

Katherine Warman Kern
@comradity

“Objective” now means give ‘em pablum and for heaven’s sake don’t follow through on any story that the corporate bosses might find “inappropriate” or objectionable (to them).

“Disinterested” now means UNnterested. Don’t bother to research any story. Don’t check anything for factual veracity. Write any damn thing any idiot tells you and never call him out.

“Detached” now means steer clear of real news and forget about integrity; it’s soooo passe.

“Transparent” now means editors, reporters, and TV anchors are viewing the world through clear, colorless windows in padded rooms that seals them off from the real world. They’ve gone loopy on us for fear of disappointing their corporate bosses.

There are lots more like these, but one gets depressed observing our biased and dysfunctional media.

To the CM, facts are no longer the “hard things” that our founding father, John Adams, cited in a famous trial. They are now relative, slippery, Fox “News” fantasies, and often even negligible. Don’t bother with facts. What the public wants is controversy and sensational garbage. Facts are too dull, right?
Would that Walter Cronkite, Fred Friendly, and Dan Rather were still active and leading the media the way to real, honest, competent journalism, with conscience and integrity.

There’s a lazy kind of analysis that just pastes on superficial phrases like “In a turning point for the presidency …”

What we’re really talking about is Snopes journalism, from the urban-legends-busting site Snopes.com, where they track down the truth of something, call it, and stand behind it.