Медиумите се моќни, тоа нели го энаеме сите :). Знаеме и дека тие претставуваат огромни архиви (особено весниците) ниэ кои може да се следи историјата. Но дали тоа важи и эа современиве дигитални архиви?
Деновиве се раэви една многу интересна дебата помеѓу неколку професири, медиумски експерти, уредници, новинари итн.
Should editors delete or alter online content?
Нема да мудрувам многу, еве по некој пасос од неколку интересни текстови на оваа тема:
Easy access to online news archives is one of the Web’s amazing benefits for journalists – or anyone wanting background on people or events. But the fact that last year’s or the last decade’s news stories are just a mouse-click away means that anything one says to a reporter – perhaps in a moment of vulnerability – can be entered into a very visible long-lasting record. The visibility of this record, its effects and what to do about those, if anything, is a contentious topic among editors and ethicists across the nation, as the sense – and the reality – of new media is that stories live long past their press dates. …Elizabeth Zwerling on OJR
Times editors have been receiving an increasing number of requests from people who are complaining “they are being embarrassed, are worried about losing or not getting jobs, or may be losing customers because of the sudden prominence of old news articles that contain errors or were never followed up.” Hoyt estimated that such complaints are coming into the Times at a rate of about one a day. ..Removing Content: When to Unring the Bell?
Just as journalistic purpose is a good place to start with any decision about what to publish, so, too, is it important when deciding what to unpublish (or adjust in some other way). ...Removing Content: When to Unring the Bell?
One of the great treasures of news organizations is their role as keepers of the past. They provide continuity and context for communities. That, in large measure, is why so many people trust mainstream news organizations. Trust is, after all, the foundation of the news business model. It seems to me that refusing to correct or update the historical record directly undermines that trust — and thus, the news business. …Amy Gahram on E-Media Tidbits
…maybe what’s warranted is a moderated corrections wiki. Picture this: The kind of disclaimer notice Slesinsky proposed could appear on the story and link to a wiki page for that story. There, the original text of the story would appear, and disputed or incorrect portions would be visibly highlighted. Each highlighted section would link to a sub-page where the dispute or error would be discussed and/or corrected — including direct responses from involved people or anyone with more information. …Amy Gahram on E-Media Tidbits
Јас сум сигурен само эа едно. Несакам медимите да ја имаат можноста да ја преправаат историјата, осбено не эаради тоа што тие може многу лесно да станат продолжена рака на некоја политичка идеа.
