A lengthy entry about the Virginia Tech massacre appeared on Wikipedia almost instantly this week, including a timeline of events, links to biographies of the victims and the shooter, photos and historical context.
Wikipedia, the online community encyclopedia, written and maintained by readers, is just one example of how Internet reporting came of age in this week’s horrific tragedy.
Journalism used to be considered the first draft of history. Now there’s no time for drafting.
As Monday’s immediate revelations of the latest campus shootings demonstrated, history is digitally recorded, uploaded, posted and streamed by people on the ground well before the mainstream media can digest it.
The confirmations, fact-checking and thoughtful shaping of a narrative come later. In most cases, the mainstream media’s evening reports put the official stamp on the buzz generated for hours beforehand in the cyber world. Yet the old guard still represents the ultimate destination for major aspects of a story: When the shooter wanted to put his ravings before the world, he chose a commercial TV network.
NBC, like the other networks, did much of its research online in reporting the Virginia Tech story. The network posted a profile on Facebook, for instance, asking students to share any knowledge they might have of the gunman.
NBC, that old-line media company, was pulled into the story and, to its surprise, became the source for a glimpse inside the mind of a murderer.
Such are the conflicting trends of the week: The Internet played an increasingly vital role in the news coverage, connecting people and disseminating ideas, but the mainstream network nightly newscast still carried the national conversation.
Like unscripted or “reality TV,” the Internet’s improv version of history isn’t always smooth. It’s like what the networks call “rough cuts,” unpolished versions to be touched up with sound, lighting and effects for broadcast.
Initially MySpace, YouTube and Facebook picked up where ABC, CBS and NBC left off on the Virginia Tech story, as the journalistic world got a real-time example of the shift to digital media.
Blogs, chat rooms and social networking sites, notably Facebook, quickly compiled obituaries that felt much more personal than the traditional scrolling names and headshots seen on television. For one thing, visitors could sign in and leave notes of condolence.
Nielsen reported web traffic to news sites Monday increased by 5 million, to 30 million users. Mainstream media outlets jumped on the websites, trolling for fresh sources.
The Virginia Tech student- run media site, planetblacksburg.com, kept news flowing even while under lockdown, and followed through the week, offering “The Wall,” a place for user comments and expressions of grief.
Completing the circle, subscribers to Internet sites railed against journalists creeping inside their social networks seeking quotes. Call it Journalism 2.0: the search for sources now leads to cyber-sites. Instead of perusing phone directories or distributing business cards, reporters now post online requests for eyewitness footage.
Particularly in a rural college town far from the usual media centers, the old media bumped into the new in an awkward confrontation that underscored how things have changed. By the time the well-known anchor faces arrived on the scene, the story had taken root online.
“Blogs first, mainstream media second,” as a writer on a popular site, cybersociology, described his information diet.
Then came NBC’s receipt of the killer’s missive, and ongoing debates about whether and how the network should have aired the material. The more things change, the more the Big Three stay the same.
Should the shifting positions of old and new technology force changes in journalistic ethics? I’m with NBC on this one: The “multimedia manifesto” was newsworthy. If the gunman had filmed the murders, restraint would have been required.
As for copycat possibilities, anyone who can be pushed over the edge by seeing a video is already insane. Going forward, let’s hope every college administration checks its file of problem cases.
TV critic Joanne Ostrow can be reached at 303-954-1830 or jostrow@denverpost.com.
