Facts & News
Overflights on 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 wonder about some of the 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 forcing journalism today to question What about today news, and how to go untreated. Let's go point by point:
1) Before the advent of the Net participatory and social networks, to establish the 'agenda of the world were few: the various institutional actors - governments et similaria - and major news agencies based in countries dominate. With the result that a number of news and events - from the wars "forgotten" child labor through child soldiers, just to give some examples - had no chance of access to the mainstream media and the most heart warming of the willing, committed campaigns which, not surprisingly, were called counter-information. Today, fortunately, is no longer so. Web 2.0 and social networking sites in fact act as "accelerators of social and political crises." It 's the case of the' Uganda and Video Kony 2012, posted by an NGO simple (though powerful and well intrallazzata), but the discussion could be worth for many, recent press campaigns, which have focused precisely on I Like and Share, but managed to break through click after click in public opinion much better than they can do the traditional media, which, indeed, they were forced to resume news . I exaggerate a bit ', perhaps, but it seems to me that the agenda of the world is no longer dictated in a manner strictly mainstream, and it is made permeable to diverse pressures, even from the bottom, which modify themes and priorities, ensuring greater pluralism and therefore a higher rate of participation. Which is a good thing. Or am I wrong?
2) As it happens, however, in these cases, not all that glitters is gold. And it's always the example of Kony in 2012 to prove it. Established fact that through the Network for Participatory there is any possibility of an impact on the 'agenda setting that matters, a whole range of subjects that have put home matt on 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 battle without rules, where it is not easy to defend, because very often the user of the Web 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 obvious.
3) It is up to us, information professionals, make a difference. Ie filter and 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 mature.