Scan-N-Land

In praise of gatekeepers, part II

It occurred to me that my last post didn't back up my title. I confess I was writing while at work, waiting for a story to be edited. Then had to bolt to meet a friend for dinner before finishing my thought.

One would think I'd have oceans of time to write and think extracurricularly this week with my boys and girls, aka the US Congress, out of town. But noooo! This being the holiday season, our papers are HUGE (more money for me, or more accurately, our shareholders!). Therefore, the editors are squeezing vast quantities of blood out of us turnips....

But I digress....

The point I want to make about the internet is this: While I am enthusiastic about its possibilities, I am also skeptical of my webbies' overenthusiasm. Not only do unedited streams of information pose many possibilities for mischief (some of which I alluded to in my earlier post), but they threaten to fall of their own weight.

Take our own situation as an example: As an interactive journalism student, I now regularly have to check: 1) my AU email account; 2) a blackboard account, and 3) a blog. This in addition to my work email account and a Yahoo account that I had to set up for reasons I won't bore you with here. Plus all the other reading I do as a semi-competent citizen of the world. And every now and then I like to sneak in an actual novel.

How many average people, who aren't information queers, who have lives to live and kids to raise, meals to prepare and jobs to do, have time for all this??

This is why I think there will ALWAYS be a place for gatekeepers in journalism, whether it be the dead-tree variety or the kind consumed in electrons. People want a place they can go for RELIABLE and CONCISE summaries of what's going on in their world. The internet will give them more choices, for which I say, bravo. But gatekeeping will remain a steady and necessary and honorable profession. That's my crotchety MSM prediction.

Kathy K

posted by Mark H. @ 12/01/2006 08:33:00 AM