Fifteen of Germany’s most popular bloggers have written the Internet Manifesto, 17 declarations about “how journalism works today.”
The post was made last week (we’ve been away because of a loss in our family) and, according to reports, was so popular its server went down for a while. “The 17 declarations were discussed worldwide,” says Mercedes Bunz, one of the participants, in the Tech Crunch blog. “Guardian columnist Jeff Jarvis retweeted every declaration to his nearly 25,000 Twitter followers. The declarations were blogged, commented upon and widely discussed. And they even gathered attention in the newspapers.
“… Starting with the sentence ‘The Internet is different,’ the 17 declarations might not be hot news, but they tie together some of more innovative positions about journalism in the age of the net. The authors believe that the internet improves journalism if the media adapt their working methods to today’s technological reality, ‘instead of ignoring or challenging it.’ Furthermore, the signatories claim that ‘copyright becomes a civic duty on the Internet.’ And that there is indeed a value of quality online, because ‘the Internet debunks homogeneous bulk goods.’ Therefore, there is money in online journalism, although ‘tradition is not a business model’ – its business model has to be adapted to the rules of the net.”
Among other statements in the manifesto:
* “Journalism’s self-conception is — fortunately — being cured of its gatekeeping function. All that remains is the journalistic quality through which journalism distinguishes itself from mere publication.” And, later in the manifesto: “Qualitatively speaking, no differentiation should be made between paid and unpaid journalism, but rather, between good and poor journalism.”
* “7. The net requires networking.
“Links are connections. We know each other through links. Those who do not use them exclude themselves from social discourse. This also holds for the websites of traditional media companies.
“8. Links reward, citations adorn.
“Search engines and aggregators facilitate quality journalism: they boost the findability of outstanding content over a long-term basis and are thus an integral part of the new, networked public sphere. References through links and citations — especially including those made without any consent or even remuneration of the originator — make the very culture of networked social discourse possible in the first place. They are by all means worthy of protection.”
* And in the 17th statement, claims we’re not so sure of: “When in doubt, the ‘generation Wikipedia’ is capable of appraising the credibility of a source, tracking news back to its original source, researching it, checking it and assessing it — alone or as part of a group effort. Journalists who snub this and are unwilling to respect these skills are not taken seriously by these Internet users. Rightly so. The Internet makes it possible to communicate directly with those once known as recipients — readers, listeners and viewers—and to take advantage of their knowledge. Not the journalists who know it all are in demand, but those who communicate and investigate.”
“Capable” of appraising credibility, sure. Motivated or cognizant of the need? Not often enough.