Everyone wants to be heard- this is the one major(ly annoying) trait that we all possess, no matter your gender, age, culture, etc., everybody wants somebody to listen to them. This (on media platforms) has resulted in the common occurrence of media users not only listening or observing information, but they are creating their own information.
Hence, the topic of this blog- Passive consumers, active participants and what is truly considered as ‘journalism’.
Media audiences used to be ‘passive consumers’- the simple act whereupon the individuals of the audience would do no more than view or listen to any media content that was shown to them (for example, you can’t do much else when watching television except for watching the screen). However, the encouragement of ‘active participants’ within an audience has increased rapidly in recent times as media platforms have evolved- this means that not only are we consumers of the media, but we can also now be producers of media: or ‘prosumers’.
The internet is what is called dialogic– meaning that anyone can broadcast any message directly, and that gatekeepers (that normally manage and maintain any content produced) are weak or non-existent. With this, groups of individuals or a singular individual can produce their own opinions through media content- giving access to any and all who are willing to view or listen to this content, hence the ‘All for One and One for All’ method: one person to many or many people to one. An example of dialogic media that encourages ‘active participants’ are the social media giants that we are commonly exposed to on a daily basis- Twitter, Facebook and YouTube.
Through social media platforms similar to that of the Twitter or Facebook style of posting, tweeting and commenting, audiences are actively engaging with what they see or hear almost instantaneously. This is a rapid process because of the privacy of the audiences identity- they say whatever they want through these medias because of their anonymity, thus, in turn, encouraging activity of audiences through the written (or typed) word. Similar to me writing this blog- I write my opinion, others read said opinion and then comment their opinion based on what is read or seen. It’s a never-ending process of opinions and comments!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQcW9gijs_0 <- check out for more on the drone footage!
Above, you will find footage captured from a drone that was uploaded onto YouTube in June 2013. The drone captured footage of the police clash that occurred in Taksim Gezi Park in Istanbul on the 11th June 2013. Something to consider: is this a form of journalism? Potentially, they have captured footage and are actively posting it onto a media platform- which in turn encourages activity in audiences to form an opinion on the situation. This is also an example of how audiences are dependent on the internet for information and news on situations around the world.
An interesting question was brought up during my lecture about this topic- seeing as audience members are becoming more active and are producing their own news; are we seen as journalists because of our comments, blogs or even tweets? And this was asked, ‘If someone was killed- if they’re seen as a journalist through active participation –does that mean we are killing journalism? For example, the drone mentioned before was shot down- so if it was recording for journalistic purposes …
Was journalism ‘ultimately’ killed?
For more information, check out these sites: