I agree with Jarvis’s model of the press sphere. Today there are so many contributors to how readers get their news. The days of reading groundbreaking news from the daily newspaper are long gone. News is instantaneous now and the press only plays a minor role in informing us. Observers, witnesses, media, the government, etc. all play a part in getting the news to us; it’s a joint effort.
And I think this joint effort is an improvement from the past of only receiving news from one source. One positive change is that having more sources eliminations some bias. Before, there was one source, the newspaper, with one contributor, the press. Now, there are millions of sources to get the news and millions of contributors. You can read the same story from multiple perspectives and then form your own opinion. I feel that before people read a story in the newspaper and had to believe it because there was nothing else they could compare it too.
One aspect I found confusing in Jarvis’s models was the size of the circles in the new press sphere. I am curious if the size of each circle has anything to do with how important he views that contributor is. To me, it seems like the witnesses’ and observer’s circles are significantly larger than the data circle. Does that mean Jarvis thinks our news comes more from witnesses and observers than data?
I think his model is very accurate to my experiences with the news. I get my news from a multitude of sources, mostly online. I watch the news on TV, I get it from newspapers online, online blogs, and sometimes even Facebook and Twitter.
No comments:
Post a Comment