Looking back at my first post, I think my definition of online journalism has changed somewhat. I've learned a great deal about blogging and twitter, and just how easy it is to get news online in this ever-changing technological world. I now feel like online journalism can really be anything- from the New York Times to Joe Shmoe's blog about a small-town in Idaho. Fast-paced and increasingly popular, online journalism seems to be the future.
What I don't think I emphasized enough in my first post was how the audience is involved. Allowing people to comment on stories from online newspapers and even individual's blogs is a great way to connect with your audience. Online journalism seems to be more of a conversation. I like that. It's like when you're in class: no one likes just sitting there and being lectured to, unless you need sleep of course. Participating in a discussion about what's going on, what you like, or how you feel about something of note is just plain more exciting. Reactions. Isn't that part of a good story anyway? Getting people's reactions to an event is essential to a story. I mean the good ol' this happened on this day at this time for this long is great, but, people and their reactions make a story real, and good, for that matter.
What is online journalism?
10 years ago