This is fascinating to listen to 7 years after his delivery. His predictions ring true, but also fall short of fulfillment. His call to support Slow Journalism is still relevant.
Fantastic talk; what annoys me is that I know I ought to take the daily rags with a pinch of salt, but then I'm too tired/lazy/time-poor/distracted to read long form or well researched books, absorb the news and mean to question it, but don't do that in any meaningful way, and realise when actually speaking to people or reviewing my own thoughts/opinions that I've unwittingly been affected by a lot of ill-thought-out, small-return bullshit. Great stuff, journalism is too important to be left to marketing. With music we somehow know when something is an X Factor or the real deal, but with journalism a) we kind of think it's true, or someone would get sued and b) music and fiction may affect how we feel but don't pretend to present objective truth.
I'm afraid I'm pessimistic - I just cannot see how slow journalism can survive in a digital age. It's sad as I don't think bot journalism or social media can really help people get the real story. Social media seems to mostly promote and boost opinions (not intentionally, it's just how it works) rather than truth. Personally I find that quite worrying.
Slow journalism will survive, perhaps, if people are willing to pay for a good story. I don't see why not if the cost is split between millions of people. It is probably about the same as it has been with newspapers et al. We are just passing through a transition now, but the Universe is said to operate in cycles... I personally love Twitter and Tumblr, and even automatic newsbots will be cool to have, I presume, since the automation of labor does free the hands of people for more creative labor.
Well, it's been 10 years. And yes just about everything here rings true (minus no more printed news). But yes, our news is delivered to us according to our digital preferences (our biases).
Something I noticed when it's about an event having anything to do with Islam or Muslims. After I do my research and check different perspectives it's quite disturbing how wrong the given image is. Stories are not complete or the wrong motives are given etc.
I'm watching this 8 years later and it is spot-on. Automated journalism is here. No fact-finding or details. Just opinions
This is fascinating to listen to 7 years after his delivery. His predictions ring true, but also fall short of fulfillment. His call to support Slow Journalism is still relevant.
Jill, do you think that slow journalism is getting more interest or traction over this time?
Rob Orchard is a thoughtful and caring journalist. He is to be admired.
An amazing speaker, I really enjoyed how he made me think about stories that I recall but never got the answer from.
Very informative, I heard some new for me aspects. Thank You.
AI-generated articles rings so true today, along with actual, laborious, investigative journalism (like Watergate) being mostly dead; brilliant talk!
Fantastic talk; what annoys me is that I know I ought to take the daily rags with a pinch of salt, but then I'm too tired/lazy/time-poor/distracted to read long form or well researched books, absorb the news and mean to question it, but don't do that in any meaningful way, and realise when actually speaking to people or reviewing my own thoughts/opinions that I've unwittingly been affected by a lot of ill-thought-out, small-return bullshit. Great stuff, journalism is too important to be left to marketing. With music we somehow know when something is an X Factor or the real deal, but with journalism a) we kind of think it's true, or someone would get sued and b) music and fiction may affect how we feel but don't pretend to present objective truth.
Really awesome. I've thought this would be a great idea for a few years now, how am I only just hearing this?
Awesome talk!
Very nice lecture!
I'm afraid I'm pessimistic - I just cannot see how slow journalism can survive in a digital age. It's sad as I don't think bot journalism or social media can really help people get the real story. Social media seems to mostly promote and boost opinions (not intentionally, it's just how it works) rather than truth. Personally I find that quite worrying.
Very well said... thank you!
Great talk :)
Slow journalism will survive, perhaps, if people are willing to pay for a good story. I don't see why not if the cost is split between millions of people. It is probably about the same as it has been with newspapers et al. We are just passing through a transition now, but the Universe is said to operate in cycles... I personally love Twitter and Tumblr, and even automatic newsbots will be cool to have, I presume, since the automation of labor does free the hands of people for more creative labor.
Well, it's been 10 years. And yes just about everything here rings true (minus no more printed news). But yes, our news is delivered to us according to our digital preferences (our biases).
So Watergate was better journalism than the Mail Online? Hardly, a revelation is it?
I wonder what would be said about news in America today!!!
Something I noticed when it's about an event having anything to do with Islam or Muslims. After I do my research and check different perspectives it's quite disturbing how wrong the given image is. Stories are not complete or the wrong motives are given etc.
This makes me sad
12:06 ***** iets voor jou?