Frankly, I don't like some of the things being said in this article.
But it is highly relevant. The fact is that content -- good content -- is no longer an objective thing.
Nor is it confined to one Website.
Not is it necessarily "objective."
I do believe that "curation" and "editing" are critical in the journalistic sense (my favourite example being mineral water being a guaranteed version of the free liquid)
However, as this guy argues, point of view, virality and relevance in a narrow, defined sense are critical. Accept it.
But it is highly relevant. The fact is that content -- good content -- is no longer an objective thing.
Nor is it confined to one Website.
Not is it necessarily "objective."
I do believe that "curation" and "editing" are critical in the journalistic sense (my favourite example being mineral water being a guaranteed version of the free liquid)
However, as this guy argues, point of view, virality and relevance in a narrow, defined sense are critical. Accept it.
1 comment:
I am not sure why Ben pretends that all content is an amorphous mass and EVERYTHING follows his 4 main rules. There is news and there is analysis. As readers we subconciously do make the distinction, never mind the media we actually get our information and analysis from. End users are not sheep however much we may bleat.
Post a Comment