For the next week, posts on this blog will be infrequent since I'll be reporting on the WTO events. If you miss me, you can find me at The Standard website where we will have a blog to cover WTO-related issues.
I'm cross-posting a blog I wrote because I, along with friends staring in the media industry are working on a group media. It's called Media Mix (tentatively) and I hope it will generate thoughtful discussion about media. If you like it, I'd appreciate your help with promoting the new blog. As I said in the upcoming paragraphs, I believe more voices means a better discussion. This is what I wrote tonight:
The international media have arrived in Hong Kong for the WTO meetings set to start on Tuesday. These media also include the alternative media many who attended a conference at City University this weekend. I attended the conference called "New Media and Social Transformations" on assignment and out of personal interest because as you may have noticed, I like to blog.
I met people from Indy Media Japan, Pinoy Weekly (a Filipino alt-newspaper), OhMyNews (originally Korean), Real World Radio (from Uruguay) and others. Although attendence was only a few dozen people, there were attendees and speakers from all over the world. Unsurprisingly, alternative media is overwhelmingly leftwing and this conference was no exception.
The discussions were interesting, although not necessarily groundbreaking. I came out of the Friday sessions still uncertain if "alternative" or "independent" online media will ever breakaway from its bad reputation (unaided by the recent Wikipedia issue) for lacking accuracy and authority.
I asked speakers if they believe accuracy is their responsibility, how they ensure there is accuracy and if they don't believe it's their responsibility, then whose is it? No one really answered my question as it was lost due to poor moderation on the conference's behalf. During another session, however, David Kootnikoff of OhMyNews said every story is read by editors and fact-checkers.
But IndyMedia does not believe in fact-checking or much editing said Gabi Hadl from IndyMedia Japan. She said IndyMedia is not about journalism so much as it is about creating a discussion. I've always respected the IndyMedia network of websites but I think Hadl's got it wrong. If I understood her correctly, she seemed to imply, facts are less important than dialog. My question is what's dialog worth if it's not based on truth?
Of course, I say this now as a member of the evil mainstream media so take my opinion for what it's worth to you. Although I blog and consider myself "left wing" (if this scale is applicable still), I guess I'm one of the bad guys who the alternative press argue isn't telling the whole story. They say, Hong Kong media are not addressing the issues of protestor but sensationalizing the isolated incidents of violence. But the truth is, I've always rooted for the underdog. My personal opinion is the world benefits from having more voices. However, intelligent dialog cannot happen without accuracy and facts, regardless of who you are reporting for.