« Blog ethics | Main | The next step »
Do online critics matter?
Corneel wrote about it, and I was at the same debate.
I have been at several debates, and sorry, to say, often been disappointed in the debate itself as it doesn't seem like what I understand under 'debate'
C. rightfully mentioned that probably I go to debates with subjects I know too much about, and the rest of the audience is probably seeing things differently as they know less about the matter. (But C., last time we went, we both went outside because of 'bored'ness ..)
The debate at Vooruit was kind of missing the point somewhat I believe.
While the video interviews kind of meant to trigger the speakers, it clearly in several ways was not perceived in that way.
Stefan Kolgen presented their online theater project, and the speakers doubted the project in several senses.
I do too. But I think you have to think beyond and have a discussion about what is possible. Talk about if this is still theater and not, philosophize about it.
Similar story about influential, new media vs old media, of Clo.
Clo made a certain statement. Something to discuss about. How can internet be compared to traditional media, and how can someone use it to reach its audience. How to be dared to implement new ways.
And that's when I noticed all represented speakers were part of a 'traditional' set up. All had a 'redactie', 'writers/journalists'. As if the internet is a copy of printed media.
Which, sorry to say, it is not.
I certainly missed debrakkehondblogt in the panel, and if not available, the video speakers on the podium, to discuss with the available speakers.
That could have turned into a nice interesting talk.
It is when Urbanmag presented their renewed site, I noticed there is still a long way to go: 'we implemented a new look, comments and rss'.
Heck, it is nothing else than the structure of a blog, in a different lay out...
And that's the whole point, when does online representation matters. When you can be found, in google, when your content gets aggregated in other sites.
In the end you get the same story as offline: you have to reach your potential readers.
I think Urbanmag, if they did well and implemented a blog cms, will get more successful in its genre.
Mainly because it will get a better place in google, and thus more readers.
Do I think online critics matter?
They do. But only when I trust the source. And even then, I agree with Corneel, I'll trust a friend often better than an online critique. I guess that's exactly what Vooruit is busy with: enabling you or your friends to upload your own critique and thus influencing possible visitors.
Technorati Tags: online critics
Posted on May 27, 2007
in structured thoughts
Digg this | 
Add to Delicious | Technorati reactions | Permalink | 
Comments (3)
Comments
Thanks for mentioning brakkehondblogt!
Posted by Britt Mesdagh | May 30, 2007 10:39 AM@Britt, interesting post on this topic on your blog.
Posted by sven | June 2, 2007 1:31 PMI've been following this discussion a bit on several sites and it seems that the journalists are somewhat protective concerning their status as a pro. It reminds me of a post on Pietel which refers to Ine (but I can't find the original post here) where he mentioned that amateurs are invading the field of the pros. When the means (of writing and publishing, designing, photographing, ...) become available to a lot of people, instead of being only available to the "elite", it's just logical that common people will use it on a large scale and that this shift will result in changes on all sorts of levels. Some will be good and make a difference, others will be very bad (and that's where the pros will focus on in their counterarguments). Nothing is going to stop that process, not even a thousand more discussions on that matter.
I think the reason why journalists are protective of their jobs is because they are under a lot of pressure. Newspapers and magazines have become commercial machines.
Posted by Britt Mesdagh | June 2, 2007 11:16 PMI did some pieces as a freelance journalist myself last year and had to sign a contract which stated that I waived all my copyrights on the text. So the magazine could print my article and also use it in digital form in any way and as much as they wanted, without even mentioning the author's name.
That's not right.
For a 3500 word piece with photo's I earned 125 euros (minus taxes). So I wonder, how can you write a quality article and earn enough money to survive?