Online Journalism in Times of Disaster

OJ1#7

Online Journalism is never more important than when it is used to inform people all over the world of disasters. Live streaming allows for concerned citizens to be kept updated on crucial and critical information. Floods, tsunamis, cyclones and fires. Terrorist attacks, protests and killings. When tragedies occur, people turn to the internet for the most up-to-date and immediate information.

In Australia, the January floods were a testing time for Queensland and northern New South Wales, with the area inundated and lives lost. Reporters in the region were suddenly overwhelmed by not only the need to deliver up to date information and important facts, but many experienced the flooding first hand.

Melbourne ABC journalist, Will Ockenden , was flown in to help cover the Queensland floods in rural Queensland and was unexpectedly caught up in the middle of the Toowoomba flash flood disaster. His story here: http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2011/01/11/3110327.htm

The ABC radio building in the Brisbane suburb of Toowong, was surrounded by floodwaters and much of the important flood information for the region was broadcast from their Gold coast studio. ABC online In Milton, Brisbane, was also very affected by flooding, with their main building inundated by water and with some reporters being unable to leave their homes.

Read ABC reporters full account here: http://blogs.abc.net.au/newseditors/2011/01/from-newsroom-to-lounge-room.html


Social media updates by government organisations also play a key role in disaster management in Australia. Journalists refer the public to the Bureau of meteorology for precise local weather information, quote the relevant police media social networking updates and add vital emergency information media releases elements to their stories.

The Price of Free Online Journalism

OJ1#6

Mr and Mrs. Newspaper aren’t happy at the moment. They’re being less read by the community, meaning their advertising space is worth less and they’re competing with the 24hour news cycle, meaning their stories can easily become out-dated. Their loyal readers seem to be a minority, with most switching to online. The newspaper family are trying their hardest to capture online readers. They’re giving promotional access to ipad apps and mobile phones, and posting their stories online on their organisations web page. Most news sites are free to view. So why would anyone pay to read the stories they print when they appear at no cost to the reader online? And not to mention, it is impossible for a printed newspaper to be as up to date as its online counterpart….is that really feasible in a reporting environment where breaking stories and reporting first seem crucial?

No, says global media moguls, who want online readers to start paying to view content. They argue good quality journalism must come at a cost. This seems understandable; the journalist needs to eat so therefore needs to be paid. The organisation they work for need money to pay them. Quality journalism and hard work should be financially rewarded but here’s what no one seems to say. Members of the public don’t care about journalists pay cheques, some do care about quality news but to the masses, news is news. And why would you pay for something you can get for free?

Online Journalism can too financially benefit from advertising, which is how many new media outlets have funded their establishment…but according to Rupert Murdoch, this simply isn’t enough.  He believes good journalism must be paid for and by offering exclusive and competitive content, online news consumers will be happy to pay. In this 2009 story, http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/aug/06/rupert-murdoch-website-charges   it was reported the Murdoch would roll out internet news charges, but two years later, his rollout has been minimal.

The Murdoch owned Wall St Journal, is one of the few online news publications to charge for content.

 

Murdoch speaking about paying for journalism content

For now, let’s enjoy what’s free but appreciate quality work provided by dedicated journalists.

Put Up or Shut Up

OJ1#5

Online in 2011 It's a race against time (and other news organisations) and online journalists are out to win. Who can provide the most accurate and ethically sourced news the fastest? If you can't compete... don't play the game. Who dares to win? With freelancers and emerging publications competing against the giants.

Some news organisations have been criticized for their poor online presence, with channel 7 news Australia currently unable to provide an online platform to watch news broadcasts, already shown on television. This error is a source of frustration for 7 news loyalists who want to watch their favourite news program but due to not being able to settle down in front of the TV at the required time, miss out.

News organisations need to better accommodate the busy , modern consumer if they want to remain viable and competitive. News needs to go online as soon as possible and it’s important for people to enjoy their news program at their own convenience. The ABC IView as an example of good online viewing service. The platform allows viewers to catch up on any program they are interested in and ABC news 24 is streamed live. Live streaming ensures people who don’t have access to a tv can watch the news from their computer or mobile phone, regardless of where they are. People at work or overseas, can finally enjoy TV online and the organisations that provide the best and most continue to dominate in online popularity.

Comments Please

OJ1#4

Once upon a time impassioned citizens wrote letters to their newspapers Letter to the Editor section. They wrote in about stories and local issues that stirred their emotions, made their blood boil and tugged at their heart strings. The newspaper would publish a select number of the many letters they received and only those would be published in the following day’s news. Letters to the editor still exist but online news allows unlimited comments and news organisations readily encourage news consumers to comment online. News organisations and media bloggers want to know what the public think, or at least appear to.

Opening news stories up for direct commentary and criticism online leads to a range of new issues. One of those issues is who will monitor comments posted online. Some news websites publish only approved comments, which are screened before they are posted. Others, allow for comments to be added immediately and later checked. Nearly all news websites require the person commenting to submit some personal details before submitting, such as their location and email address.

People are often less accountable for their actions online, as some feel it’s not as ‘real’. Posting online allows people to anonymously share their opinions and encourages them to communicate with fellow commentators. The positive side of this is that the platform means more people than ever are sharing their views, thus widening the range of backgrounds and peoples represented within commentaries. The negative side, is people are more likely to be rude or outlandish when there is little accountability. While debate, is useful and necessary in democracy, people tend to find with each other via online commentary, which takes away from the essential and important elements of the story being reported.

Online commentary should continue to be encouraged, but news organisations worried about fighting users and crude remarks need to create a system which creates more individual user accountability if they wish to address this issue. It is also vital News organisations allow a wide range of comments, without much censoring of opinions, as it’s the media asking for comments, the media should be able to handle them, regardless of political and personal beliefs.