
I recently heard that local TV news departments are using Twitter, Facebook, etc to find stories. Well, let me rephrase it, the local morning newscasts have dedicated a few assignment desk editors to look for "trends" online, so they can assign stories on what some people are posting. Not a bad idea, but what makes news these days? Ok, if a video of a cat playing the piano is suddenly popular on line, should it make it to the local newscast? Most news reporters that I talked to are not happy about it. And it's not because they think they're above that, it's because we are becoming more like TMZ (no disrespect, Josh) and not what we were created for. Suddenly, we want to become "cool", web centric. We are TV local news. We're not cool. So, instead of embracing the technology to improve our product, we are embracing the products that have been highlighted by the new technology (specially here in LA, any content that has to do with Hollywood and Paris Hilton). I'm currently reading, "The Revolution Will not be Televised.." by Joe Trippi. Trippi makes the argument that Howard Dean's campaign for the 2004 election was the result of our current social media tools. Dean's staff was able to raise a huge amount of money through small on line donations. At the end, we all know how Howard Dean ended, but the seeds for a new way to finance campaigns were planted. Trippi also argues that the conventional media really disliked Dean, in part because his staff circumvented them. Now the same conventional media seems to be trying to become a mirror image of the online space. How sad. Now we see all these anchors preaching "follow me on Twitter" or "talk to me on Twitter". Don't believe the hype. Most of them won't talk to you, not even in person if they had the chance. Ok. May be you can talk to them on Twitter, but that doesn't mean they will talk to
you.