This post is the 14th in a series for a graduate course called Theory and Audience Analysis. For the course, I will be posting weekly questions and follow-up analysis about the various readings we are assigned. This post is an initial reaction to the topic of democracy in new media.
In Luke Goode’s “Social news, citizen journalism and democracy” he looks at the changing role of journalism as anyone can become a content creator or editor via blogs or site’s like Digg.
Some interesting questions raised by this are about who regulates this journalism? Traditional journalism at least in its purest definition, has rules of ethics and fairness that are implemented. But when anyone can start publishing “news” does it cease to be journalism without these guidelines?
In a world where liking determines what is the main headline of the day, doesn’t the will of the masses continue the spiral of silence when it comes to hard-hitting stories about the minority opinions? In democracy, there is still always a ruling party. It shifts and changes as the members of the party shift and change, but there is still always a voice that has more power. This would seem to contrast directly with the idealism of democratic social news and citizen journalism. Yes everyone may have the opportunity to publish, but does everyone have the opportunity to be heard? Should they? Is it even possible?