Allinurl:wedding Program Templates

What redefining the concept of news? Twitter for Grandma

I check a post of Buzzmachine , sl always interesting blog of Jeff Jarvis, a talk about, anticipated, prepared on the business rules of the media and which offers clues about business models and opportunities and reforms necessary to succeed in journalism.

strikes me at the end of the article, a sentence that does not develop (at least for now): We Have Not Begun to explore new definitions of news (We have not begun new definitions of news rover).

In fact, I think this is the point central for journalists to stay within the new ecosystem of information, and without the centrality of the past in which occupied the center and now, just like a member of an audience that is "self-reports" with efficiency and even quality .
journalists feel that we lost in the jungle, without direction. The search for the right tools attracts the attention of most of our time.
we forgotten, in this confusion, the ability to generate content in depth is essential to maintain interest. Then, the format in which the offer will enable us to reach different audiences. But that's just the way we choose, not point of arrival.
Has anyone given the task, as Jarvis says, to rework the concept of news? For my part, I do not know, but I fear not. I have only
clear that this is not a fundamental issue that we are given.
In journalism school, we used definitions of news that, by traditional, have become dilapidated, that is, out of time.

• "News is what journalists believe readers are interested. Therefore, news is what interests journalists."
• "News is everything the reader needs to know."
• "News is the story of the past events of interest to more readers with no connection to those facts. "
• " News is what matters to my audience. "
• " News is all current events, interesting and communicable.
De

review only in the context of a society hypercommunicative, fall to little analysis.
Here:
not need to "believe" that interests the readers. With just live with them in social networks, this can be seen clearly.
What the reader needs to know what looks today more than ever, among his peers. Credibility is a central feature in the relations between the members of the audience, rather than an exclusive value of the media.
The narration of the news events now lives with strength in social networks. If a journalist does not offer depth, we hardly compete with other users, for worse, if they occur far from the facts and trying vainly to compete with tens of thousands of specialists scattered across the Internet.
The "current, interesting and communicable" is now the essence of social networks. Twitter is the best example.

Jarvis is right: we have not dealt with "the redefinition of the concept of news." A point so much so that Google, our universal library, it returns only 31 results and use that search term.

Until we find this new definition, I am left with another phrase from Jarvis:

Journalists should do only what brings more value. And that does not include telling the public what they already know. It is not massage the ego, or to produce. Speak to inform, investigate, select, explain, organize, teach ... Do what you know to do best and link to the rest.