Nieman Foundation at Harvard
HOME
          
LATEST STORY
Negative words in news headlines generate more clicks — but sad words are more effective than angry or scary ones
ABOUT                    SUBSCRIBE
Dec. 20, 2010, 10 a.m.

The changing of the gatekeeper: Adapting to the new roles for journalists, sources and information

We’re continuing our recaps of the Secrecy and Journalism in the New Media Age conference that took place at the Nieman Foundation on Thursday with the second panel discussion — entitled “Whither the Gatekeeper? Navigating New Rules and Roles in the Age of Radical Transparency.”

The discussion centered on the issue of how has journalism responded to WikiLeaks and others doing some of the work traditionally done by journalists — namely ferreting out documents and information — and how reporters and editors remain important as the interpreters and analysts of news.

The panel includes Walter Pincus, intelligence and national security reporter for The Washington Post, Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight, Clint Hendler, staff writer for the Columbia Journalism Review, and Maggie Mulvihill, senior investigative producer for the New England Center for Investigative Reporting. Below you’ll also find the archived liveblog and online discussion from the session.

POSTED     Dec. 20, 2010, 10 a.m.
PART OF A SERIES     Secrecy and Journalism
Show tags
 
Join the 60,000 who get the freshest future-of-journalism news in our daily email.
Negative words in news headlines generate more clicks — but sad words are more effective than angry or scary ones
A massive study of Upworthy headlines — remember Upworthy? — shows how a few emotionally charged words can mean the difference between viral and ignored.
Amazon calls it quits on newspaper and magazine subscriptions for Kindle and print
One Redditor: “I actually enjoy reading my local newspaper when it’s on the Kindle as opposed to the paper’s poorly designed website and frequently broken app.”
The Gary Lineker tweet scandal shows how the BBC has struggled to adapt to the social media age
Can “impartiality” be required from all actors, musicians, scientists, or sport pundits appearing on the BBC without thwarting the principle of free speech?