NYU student Alana Taylor recently sent some ripples through the fishbowl when she wrote a sort of scathing expose of her Luddite journalism class, misleadingly dubbed "Reporting Gen Y" but, according to Taylor, oddly lacking in a true understanding of social media or podcasts.
Professor Mary Quigley, the supposed Gen Y expert, was displeased and cited Taylor's failure to gain permission to quote the class as well as the "invasion of privacy" for the other students as a basis for banning blogging about the seminar. MediaShift's Mark Glaser cited a free speech activist who called these claims a "red herring" and Taylor also received support from her peers.
NYU junior Alana Taylor strikes a pose and vogue, vogue, vogues on the banner for her personal blog.But while an ethical debate about a journalist's responsibility to announce that she is reporting is titillating to some (remember the fishbowl?), it is important to acknowledge the deafening volumes that can be reached in an echo chamber. Responses, reinforcement and rebuttals have popped up online in only a few short weeks--before any mainstream publication picked up on this freedom of speech debate. (A Google News search turns up only blogs.)
So does this speak to, as Taylor might have us believe, the irrelevance of a paper like the Times, who has ignored the story? Or rather, to the irrelevance of the story altogether? Maybe this blog-troversy is only a vanity project, with trackbacks fueling us forward and comments validating our self-indulgence. Or does this self-flagellation and/or navel gazing speak to larger, discussion-worthy issues?
So does this speak to, as Taylor might have us believe, the irrelevance of a paper like the Times, who has ignored the story? Or rather, to the irrelevance of the story altogether? Maybe this blog-troversy is only a vanity project, with trackbacks fueling us forward and comments validating our self-indulgence. Or does this self-flagellation and/or navel gazing speak to larger, discussion-worthy issues?
1 comment:
Meaty issue, which you really sink your teeth into. Funny photo cap! ("NYU junior Alana Taylor strikes a pose and vogue, vogue, vogues on the banner for her personal blog.") Disagree with the equivalency you imply (a specious balance?) between the "ethical debate about a journalist's responsibility to announce that she is reporting" and the usual cacophony in the echo chamber. The PBS ombudsman you link to yields nearly all of Penenberg's points---as well he should, because Penenberg pretty much nails Glaser's hide to the barn door (and, by implication, the student blogger's). Also, your use of adjective "titillating" diminishes the substance and seriousness of the debate; is that all it is---red meat for the GAWKER gang? Your lede seems to acknowledge that there's more under the hood, here, than sensationalism. You link to spirited discussions that kick up a lot of ethical sand, with a host of issues in play. Arguing that "it is important to acknowledge the deafening volumes that can be reached in an echo chamber" seems to imply that the discussions you link to are all heat, no light. Is that truly the case? Also, watch out for the speed at which the Web moves: "(A Google News search turns up only blogs.)" Recent developments have rendered this statement obsolete.
You raise some interesting questions in your kicker, but I found myself craving some original reporting. Why not shoot the student blogger an e-mail and interview her here, on the record, about the issues raised by the PBS ombud?
Post a Comment