some journalistic postulates

So, I found myself (an engineer by training) in the role of journalist, albeit an amateur one, in the nascent online arena. If you'll humor me, I'd like to digress a bit to offer some thoughts about how news gets from newsmakers to the public. These observations are probably trite for anyone with a background in journalism, but they reflect the learning curve I had to climb.

Ideally, no middleman is needed- the newsmaker (who theoretically is the best source for info about its own actions) speaks directly to the public. This model can break down, however- the newsmaker is often unable and/or unwilling to do so.

Whereas the unwillingness often arises from a newsmaker's reluctance to publicize news that may have a negative impact on the public's opinion of the newsmaker, the inability may stem from:

This information gap has historically been bridged by the media. They have traditionally been defined by their means of publication (newspaper, radio station, broadcast television station, cable TV network, etc.), have plenty of professional journalists dedicated to getting the news out, and should have no qualms about relaying facts that may cast the newsmakers in a negative light. Also, the detachment from the newsmakers affords the media an opportunity to analyze large-scale patterns of action and editorialize about the newsmakers.

Over time, certain media outlets earn the trust of the newsmakers and obtain access to them in the form of credentials. Determining who gets credentials is usually straightforward- any media unit established enough to have access to a big printing press, an FCC-licensed television station, etc., has probably proven itself to be a credible source of accurate news.

The prospect of a negative editorial judgement is part of the bargain. When such a possibility is absent, the line between the journalist and the newsmaker (whose news dissemination efforts easily slide into propaganda) is erased. It's natural for the newsmaker to put its own spin on events, and it's expected that journalists will sometimes agree with the newsmaker's take on things; danger arises when the motives of the newsmaker and journalist become coincident (when there exists a conflict of interest).

Back in 1993, the efforts of the newsmakers and the traditional media weren't sating displaced Saints fans' appetite for information. The reason for this shortcoming was the inability of a given news source to master all three of the following:

For example, you could watch ESPN (national distribution, immediate reportage), but wouldn't get much detailed info about the Saints. WWL-TV offered lots of Saints-specific info every day, but out-of-towners had no access to it. You could subscribe to Saints Digest ("the official publication of the New Orleans Saints") and get a wealth of team news, but by the time it would arrive in your mailbox the news would be a week old.

The new medium of the Internet presented a way to fill the void. Its audience is (inter)national, the transmission is immediate, and the specialization of content is limited only by the will of the author. In sharp contrast to traditional media, ready access to the means of dissemination exists. Additionally, in the early days online journalism was almost entirely the domain of nonprofessionals, like myself.

When SAINTERNET began, few traditional sources had an online presence, and even fewer offered their content there. The only online "old media" site with useful Saints content was the NandO Saints SportServer (which still exists). Neither the NFL nor the Saints had an online presence; SAINTERNET's subheading of "an unofficial page for fans of the New Orleans Saints" is a vestige of the days when it was necessary to disabuse websurfers of the assumption that my page was sponsored by the team. Still, the Saints' lack of an online presence turned me into a de facto team representative; I took this responsibility seriously and was a loyal steward of the Saints brand.

A novel aspect of online media is the potential for interactivity- modes of communication other than one-way transmission of news from journalist to reader are possible. For example, Usenet, a medium for online discussion with roots over two decades old, offers a wealth of newsgroups dedicated to special interest areas that allow people to compare opinions and debate issues. In addition, hypertext, the salient feature of the Web, is a means by which websurfers can educate themselves by following links to other sources of information (such links permeate this manifesto).

go to previous / next page of the SAINTERNET manifesto