Facts & News
Pass over the many controversies that have accompanied the publication of the video on Youtube "Kony 2012" . I share them, in fact, almost all , and there is no need to go back upwards. But I find that it makes sense to ask about some trends that the success of this viral video highlights - 100 million clicks are a joke! - And that, in my humble opinion, I think are not only unavoidable but forced journalism to question today What about today news, and how to go untreated. Let's go point by point:
1) Before the advent of participatory web and social networking, to establish the 'agenda of the world were just a few: the various institutions - governments et Similaria - and the big news agencies based in countries dominate. The result is that a number of news and events - from the wars "forgotten" child labor through child soldiers, just to mention a few - they had no access to the mainstream media and the most heart warming of the willing, committed campaigns which, not surprisingly, were called counter-intelligence. Today, thankfully, is no longer so. Web 2.0 and social networking in fact act as "accelerators of social and political crises." It 's the case of' Uganda and Kony 2012 video, posted by a simple NGOs (though powerful and well intrallazzata); but the same may hold true for many, recent press campaigns, which have focused on their I Like and Share, but managed to break through click after click in public opinion much better than they can do traditional media; which, indeed, they were forced to return to the news . I exaggerate a bit ', perhaps, but it seems to me that the agenda of the world is no longer driven in a manner strictly mainstream, and is to be made permeable to diverse pressures, from below, that altering themes and priorities, ensuring greater pluralism and therefore a higher rate of participation. That's good. Or am I wrong?
2) As it happens, however, in these cases, is not all that glitters is gold. And it's always the example of Kony 2012 to prove it. Having established fact that through the Network for Participatory there is any possibility to influence on 'agenda setting matters, a number of individuals who have put the house on the opaque Web 2.0 - that is, those who are in the pay of an interest or an' ideology - try every day to muddy the waters with photos, videos and well-orchestrated campaigns - whose narrative is always appealing - to win support for their cause. It 'a fight without rules, where it is not easy to defend, because very often a web user does not have the tools to decode the messages to be transmitted. It 'been that way for the mass graves in Libya, the story of Amina, the fake Syrian blogger, and many other events that have populated the web in recent years, collecting thousands of clicks while being a sham, or more less noticeable.
3) It is up to us, professionals, make a difference. Filter and that is to separate the true from the false, the real news from propagnada or hustler. To do that, the good will is not enough: in fact need an information system that is less subservient to the rules of marketing and anchored in the rules of good journalism. But times do not seem ripe.