Social networking can be seen to be quantity over quality, if one looks at it cynically. For example, during the Obama campaign, everyone and their grandma became a pundit and a commentator. Ordinary people would attend speeches which were being covered by professional media organizations, film the speeches using mobile phones or hand-held cameras; and then post it on Youtube along with their own commentary. Some of the Youtube videos were borderline ridiculous like the 'Obama girl' videos, and there is no qualifying variable or bar that has to be passed to be able to post political opinions. Does this lead to informed debate or does it reduce the quality of information that people have access to? Are the professional media any less biased than individual users who post their own opinions and videos using social networking?
Here are some interesting articles you can find on the university library site.
Jadhav, A 2008, ‘Putting you into the democratic process’, McClatchy – Tribune Business News, Feb 24.
Vara, V 2007, ‘Friends' like these help candidates woo the young; but MySpace pages can be tricky for image makers; Hillary Clinton’s fave 16’, Wall Street Journal, May 4.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment