In ‘new media’, does credibility even matter anymore?
I’m finding myself increasingly alarmed by some of the crap out there online — and in forums like Twitter — that represents itself as journalism.
Hey, I’m all in favor of evolving our media. I’m just not in favor of relaxing our standards and ethics. Some of what I see labeled as “new media” might be technologically advanced, but it really ain’t so new at all.
Back in my day, we didn’t call it media. We called it bullshit.
Case in point: Jason Calacanis, founder of Weblogs Inc. and CEO of Mahalo.com.
Among all the media hyperventilation leading up to last week’s launch of the new Apple iPad, Calacanis reportedly let rip to his Twitter followers — all 90,000 of them — that he had been using the Apple tablet for a couple of weeks. He rattled off a list of features and gee-whiz comments that suckered in the Wall Street Journal, BusinessInsider and CNNmoney.com, among others.
Naturally, on launch day, Calacanis’ prank was discovered. Despite the fact that some of his claims should have strained even the least skeptical: Two built-in cameras and a solar recharging panel, for example. Folio’s Jason Fell reports:
He also claimed the device includes wireless charging, face recognition and an “insane” Farmville app.
That day, Calacanis linked to this commentary by a fellow online um, commentator (language alert for those of you with sensitive co-workers nearby):
So what does Calacanis have to say for himself? He’s pretty Goddamn smug about the whole thing, reports Kara Swisher of All Things Digital. Calacanis reportedly told her:
Well, it has been a pretty amusing 48 hours, and I did add 10,000 more Twitter followers. It will only make my reputation more controversial, which I love. And, there were 732 more inbound links to Mahalo.
So, who IS this guy?, I hear you ask. If you go to Mahalo.com and click on the “About Mahalo” button, you’ll see this:
Mahalo is a human-powered search engine dedicated to help people easily find information and resources they can trust.
Information and resources they can trust.
Are you serious? Or is this just another scam?
Punking people to gain Twitter followers and blog links. Please tell me this isn’t the direction we’re heading in, folks.
Find Fell’s report here. Find Swisher’s video report here.
Please note I didn’t link to Mahalo. Heh.
February 4th, 2010 at 12:23 pm
I say mahalo, but no mahalo, to that kind of crap.
February 4th, 2010 at 4:22 pm
There’s always been heaps of bullshit in legitimate news organs, too. Sometimes it’s a little harder to pick out.
For instance, this third paragraph in today’s New York Times story: “It was the second major bombing against Shiite pilgrims this week, and it underscored the helplessness of Iraq’s security forces to prevent attacks despite an imposing show of force.” Nowhere in that article ( http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/04/world/middleeast/04iraq.html ) is the claim that Iraq’s security forces are helpless attributed. It’s just inserted. Now, it may well be true, but perhaps we’d like more than the reporter’s spin on it. Or just leave it out and let us infer that from the facts.
That’s a very minor example of bullshit in the “legitimate” press, and hardly the most egregious, but you see that sort of unattributed “analysis” or spin every day if you look for it. And that’s entirely apart from the difficulty of getting the actual facts right. (If you’ve ever had journalism done to you, you know how much reporters can get wrong, or how baldly sources can lie.)
We’ve always needed to read our news with a critical eye. If anything, low-rent shenanigans like those you’ve cited might actually make that job easier.
February 4th, 2010 at 10:56 pm
I wouldn’t say this is a problem with new media exactly, but a problem with news organizations dropping their copy editors and fact-checkers as quickly as they can reasonably get away with.
Secondly, why was this tweet even reported on? Without facts to back up the tweet, Calicanis was just making a claim. Why would a legitimate news organization use a simple rumor for the basis of a story?
This was just a case of extremely poor journalism.
February 9th, 2010 at 1:51 pm
I’ve got to strongly disagree with Jim McBee’s comment. The lack of analysis by the mainstream press and just the parroting of what people say (with no critical eye on what the situation actually is - read: global warming, evolution, when politicians lie wholecloth, etc.) will be the death of journalism.
Journalists are more informed than the average person because they are right on the edge of the news and they need to USE that advantage to report what they say and hear instead of just parroting whoever will talk to them.