sábado, 14 de marzo de 2009

¿Podríamos aprender a pensar de nuevo?

¿Es impensable?

En un extraordinario texto Clay Shirky, profesor de telecomunicaciones en NYU, plantea para los diarios el escenario negro de una redefinición caótica.
Journalism has always been subsidized. Sometimes it’s been Wal-Mart and the kid with the bike. Sometimes it’s been Richard Mellon Scaife. Increasingly, it’s you and me, donating our time. The list of models that are obviously working today, like Consumer Reports and NPR, like ProPublica and WikiLeaks, can’t be expanded to cover any general case, but then nothing is going to cover the general case. When we shift our attention from "save newspapers" to "save society", the imperative changes from "preserve the current institutions" to "do whatever works". And what works today isn’t the same as what used to work. (...) 
Society doesn’t need newspapers. What we need is journalism. For a century, the imperatives to strengthen journalism and to strengthen newspapers have been so tightly wound as to be indistinguishable. That’s been a fine accident to have, but when that accident stops, as it is stopping before our eyes, we’re going to need lots of other ways to strengthen journalism instead. (...) 
For the next few decades, journalism will be made up of overlapping special cases. Many of these models will rely on amateurs as researchers and writers. Many of these models will rely on sponsorship or grants or endowments instead of revenues. Many of these models will rely on excitable 14 year olds distributing the results. Many of these models will fail. No one experiment is going to replace what we are now losing with the demise of news on paper, but over time, the collection of new experiments that do work might give us the reporting we need.
¿Podremos?

(via Rosental Calmon Alves)

1 comentario:

TP dijo...

Léalo antes en PaperPapers