default header
08 January 2008
Expert David Vaina Discusses New Media
USINFO Webchat transcript, January 8
David Vaina, research associate at the Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ), answered questions on online video, blogs and other forms of new media in a January 8 webchat. PEJ is a nonprofit organization devoted to evaluation and study of the performance of the news media.
Following is the transcript:
(begin transcript)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Bureau of International Information Programs
USINFO Webchat Transcript
Media Making Change: New Media Versus Old Media
Guest: David Vaina
Date: January 8, 2008
Time: 9:00 a.m. EST (1400 GMT)
Moderator: Today is January 8, 2008. Welcome to our webchat! The chat will begin at 09:00 EST 14:00 GMT.
Moderator: We are receiving your questions, thank you. Questions/answers will begin appearing on this screen at 09:00 EST 15:00 GMT.
David Vaina: Good morning! One thing I’ve noticed at parties and other social occasions is that everyone loves to talk about the media. I guess it is one of those few subjects that everyone knows a little something about.
Moderator: If you are just joining us, welcome. David Vaina is now reviewing your questions.
Question [Sizani]: Is there a chance that new media will replace old media in any given environment?
Answer [David Vaina]: I don't think so. The audience for new media is pretty big--and growing significantly in places like online video, social networking, and regular online news consumption--but there are way too many questions about how we’re going to pay for it.
Online ad revenue is growing but the rate is slowing down. And it needs at least a decade for it to catch up to what newspapers now generate from print ads. While it looks like revenue from online ads is something everyone can agree is the future, there just doesn’t appear to be enough money right now to pay for the type of investigative journalism that consistently makes news and influences politics.
Moderator: Today's webchat is part of the State Department's latest eJournalUSA "Media Making Change." You can view the journal at: http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itgic/1207/ijge/ijge1207.htm
Q [teddy2]: How has the relaxed values of American society, as compared to 30 years ago, affected the press? Specifically, does a journalist feel as compelled to write unbiased reports or columns? Or, was that a myth then, too?
A [David Vaina]: Everyone in the United States—from both the left and the right—argues there is bias. But I’ve looked at a lot of the quantitative research on it and I just don’t see it.
No one can remain neutral. I think journalists gave up on the idea of some pure, scientific objectivity years ago.
I think that what you see is that the press tends to go over those in power. Right now, the Republicans are in control in the US so when the press criticizes Bush, there is liberal bias.
But when the press went after Clinton, they were seen as Kenneth Starr’s allies.
In fact, you can make an argument that the press is more balanced now than 30 years ago. If the networks and newspapers can be considered allies of the left, then the right has control of talk radio and some very big names in the blogosphere.
Q [Naimat Ullah Khan]: LC Karachi: Welcome Mr. David, We would like to know something more about [Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ)], & its role in the US? What impact PEJ has on US Media & media world wide? would you like to share
A [David Vaina]: PEJ is a part of the Pew Research Center. You may have heard about the surveys Pew does in both the US and around the world. We're a non-profit "fact tank" that studies trends in the media. For example, how is the press covering Hillary Clinton differently than Barack Obama? What are the most covered stories each week? Each year? I don’t know how much impact we have. Our audience includes journalists but we probably have more of an audience in academia than anything else.
Moderator: Visit the PEJ website at: http://www.journalism.org/
Comment [Sizani]: It would appear that new media are becoming an important marketing component of old media, rather than becoming an independent/distinct source of information to the public.
Q [Rakhiya]: In your opinion, how important are journalistic traditions in the multimedia world?
A [David Vaina]: They are just as important. The Internet, in many ways, makes things easier to fact check because almost all of the world’s information is just a keystroke away, though you do have to be careful where you’re looking up and verifying your information.
But the Internet also makes things harder in some ways. I interviewed a bunch of journalism students in the U.S. last summer and the one thing they almost all said they couldn’t do was interview people over the phone. Sometimes, you have to pick up the phone and check a fact, go over a quote, etc. I don’t know if the Internet is making people shyer and more averse to talking on the phone with strangers but that’s a real concern of mine.
Moderator: Welcome to those of you just joining the webchat. We see your questions coming in. Your questions will only appear on this screen after they have been answered by our speaker. There are many questions in, we ask for your patience.
Moderator: Read David Vaina's article in the latest U.S. State Department eJournalUSA "Media Making Change" at: http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itgic/1207/ijge/vaina.htm
Q [Naimat Ullah Khan]: LC Karachi: We are totally unaware of the effectiveness the New Media has inside. Is it reshaping our lives & cultures? Is it true?
A [David Vaina]: Great question. I often think about that question and I go back and forth on whether I agree or disagree.
First, there is just so much more information. And people have access to it anytime of the day; you no longer have to wait till the morning or evening to get your news, though cable television changed that back in the early 1980s in the United States.
And citizens are becoming more knowledgeable, though do they know more about politics? Anecdotally, they seem more knowledgeable about things like health, sports, and their children’s well being thanks to the Internet, but do they know more about foreign policy? Economics? Health care policy? I’d like to say they do but I still take the side of Walter Lippman on this one and argue we still need experts to guide us once in a while.
A [Carlisle]: I host Good Morning Guatemala on the ABC Radio International affiliate here. I get more and more suggestions that I augment the exposure with a blog, but when I go to other seemingly interesting blogs, I see very few/often no comments. Are blogs a sensible way to diffuse information?
David Vaina: In my opinion, very few blogs will be successful if they aren’t doing something really different from what you find in the traditional press. You have to carve out a unique voice or talk about something you can’t find anywhere else. If you’re merely duplicating what you talk about on the radio or in the newspaper, what’s the attraction?
Moderator: If you are just joining us, welcome. David Vaina continues to review and answer your questions. A full transcript of today's webchat will be available at our USINFO Webchat Station homepage: http://usinfo.state.gov/usinfo/Products/Webchats.html
Q [Ezra Pound]: Will there be a chances for new media in less development countries to compete with well established media, without financial and technical support from the most developed countries?
A [David Vaina]: I don’t know enough about media outside of North America or Western Europe to offer some great insight.
But here’s what I’ll say. Television and newspapers are very, very expensive to start up and operate. I imagine that would probably take some kind of private financing or subsidy from the government.
And then there’s online which may seem cheaper but you still need the country to be connected even if you find the resources to finance the journalism. I know that some countries like Japan have made a serious commitment to spending government money on increasing the number of people with high-speed Internet access. Of course Japan is a wealthy, wealthy country.
So perhaps the UN, WTO, or IMF could fund more Internet access in developing countries. After all, there is research that shows how good high-speed Internet access is for the economy. Wouldn’t the economy grow globally if more people were connected?
You could also consider the growing role of non-profits in journalism. In the United States, non-profits like the Knight Foundation are funding more and more journalism, particularly citizen journalism. Perhaps there will be a push in the near future for more funding of citizens in the developing countries?
Q [Naimat Ullah Khan]: LC Karachi: How & to what extent, does Media framing influenced by Foreign Policies, National Interests & Global Politics?
A [David Vaina]: My experience is with the United States and it is a real head scratcher. The American government, as well as American business interests, are very involved in virtually every corner of the world. Yet, American news organizations continue to underfund foreign coverage. There is tons of research on how many newspapers and television networks have closed their foreign bureaus over the past 15 to 20 years, especially since the Cold War has ended.
But Americans, I’m convinced, remained interested in foreign news. That’s why, I think, you’ve seen more and more Americans reading British publications like The Guardian and the Economist and watching BBC News. These news organizations have done a better job of covering foreign events than Americans though I’m not so sure their perspective on these events is that much different from the American one.
Comment [adolatkal]: New media??? versus the very familiar old ones? Media must bring news, be trully real! What about the saying: Bis dat qui CITO dat! [He gives twice who gives quickly or opportunely]. Also bringing news, but be as the FIRST ones and trully/trustfully informing!
Moderator: David Vaina continues to review your questions.
Q [smalleyes]: what about the future? what are the new prospects in new media? old media outfits are coming out with their own new media subsidiaries. how will the old-new media configuration look like? is it good for the reporters? the audience?
A [David Vaina]: Another great question. Old Media may be adopting the technology of new media but are they fully embracing its spirit? In other words, they may look more and more alike on the surface but when you dig deeper, I’m not so sure what you’ll find will diverge.
New media is more than technology. It is many, many things (e.g. faster and with constant updates) but there is the potential to do things online that I don’t think traditional news operations will do much of anymore. For instance, I think you’ll see more bloggers like Joshua Micah Marshall spending months and months researching and exposing some major scandal in the government—particularly at the local level. .
While this will always happen at the national level because papers like the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and New York Times will continue to do great work, a great void at the local level will exist because local papers just won’t have the resources or fortitude to do investigative journalism at the local level. Local newspapers and local television station will just continue to report the headlines. But bloggers will be doing something else, even if they’re not getting paid much money for it.
Q [Andrei2]: People used to pay a price for good journalism, by simply buying the newspaper. In a market of free information of questionable standards and some great information that's also free for readers, what are the chances of journalists still asking for a price in return for quality?
A [David Vaina]: I don’t know. I think there will always be a small group of wealthy people who can and will pay for good journalism but survey research suggests there is very little evidence the majority of people will do so.
That’s a shame. I think that while free market principles should reign, both the business and educators need to do a better job getting this message out. If teachers and politicians really think good journalism is important for democracy, then this should become part of their mission, no?
Q [Rakhiya]: What's your opinion on the attempts of different regimes (governments) to control content of online publications in some way or another?
A [David Vaina]: Well, look what happened in Burma. Citizens did manage to get images and news reports out to the West despite the government’s heavy hand.
But there were still some issues about the reliability of the reporting. For instance, I was never quite sure if any monks had actually been killed, as headlines screamed. This suggests to me that we’re still a few years away from a time when government crackdowns won’t matter anymore. The technology needs time to become more sophisticated and people need to continue to outwit government censors so that they won’t matter whatsoever when it comes to the free flow of communication. It will happen, I just don’t know when.
Thank you so much, everyone. Your questions were great.
Moderator: We wish to thank David Vaina for joining us today. The webchat is now closed.
A full transcript of today's webchat will be available on our USINFO Webchat Station homepage usually within one business day.
(Guests are chosen for their expertise. The views expressed by guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Department of State.)
(end transcript)
(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
