The Center for Media Research notes that television web sites are gaining on newspaper web sites as local online destinations. Here’s a snip:
A new 85-market study, available at the Editor & Publisher/Media Week Interactive Media Conference May 23-24 . . . (reveals that) . . . many of the top ranked local web sites are stand-alone TV stations, rather than newspapers.”
Makes sense. The density of information, or the illusion of comprehensive coverage, is what drives repeat traffic and creates the habit of visiting a site. Plus TV stations have the advantage of having video roll. Newspapers are having to learn that skill.
Meanwhile grassroots or emerging web media will now have to battle upwards against two or more mass media websites in their markets. Is voice going to be enough to give the upstart media a chance to gain meaningful audience? I rather think not.
I just (don’t) want to testify: A Poynter Institute piece rekindles the blogger-or-journalist debate in the context of state shield laws that protect reporters from having to name sources or testify in court. There is another instance in Hawaii in which a blogger with mass media ties is in the middle of a court fight. An Associated Press story offers details.
My take is that this is the wrong debate. I do not favor shield laws, because I do not think there should be a distinction between the citizen journalist and the mass media journalist. (Here’s a post on that theme.) I can’t elaborate on this today. Out of time. But I hope to get back to it, perhaps tomorrow.