Online Publishers Association, The Old Boys Network New Clothes?
The OPA launches officially, but whose online quality is it anyway?
by Paola Di Maio
26 June 2001, 2 pm GMT
The internet is supposed to change everything, certainly the way information is controlled.
The internet, in its wonderful and magic wilderness, offers unprecendented sources of untapped information, and connects them without intermediation.
This obviously poses a threat for those who want to impose their views, and decide what people should, and should not know, and consequently shape the public opinion, as well as the economy and politics of the world at large.
Far too often, for example, we forget that human's lowest instincts are fed through systematic excessive violence and overexposure to abuse on television and other mass media.
Poor understanding, biased editorial filters, commercial interest, that's how the public opinion is shaped.
And certainly I do not validate that.
(I can never forget one day when all the channels of my telly were displaying either shooting, or screaming or bloody pictures, and I had to turn it off because I was in no mood for either, and there was nothing else on).
The power of the media - and its
'instrumentalisation' - is never overstated, and very few efforts are effective in controlling objectivity.
When the internet started to pervade life as we know it, many really hoped that things would be different.
Now, they can't control what people know anymore, we thought.
It was painful to realise that 'they' were lurking at the edge of the network - to use a fashionable expression - and were ready to channel their information rubbish down our online throats.
Only this time they called it 'validation and branding'.
In our terms, such concepts camouflage gagging and censorship of independent information.
When they do not like journalists, they simply concur in saying that they their writing is no good. Easy way to kick their potential worst enemies out of the game before it starts.
When editors do not suck up to them, they get no work. As simple as that.
Who is going to validate the quality of online information, cried worried Pamela Thomson Graham, CNBC Ceo last year in New York when I heard her talking to an audience who did not know any better.
Internet users are proactive and knowledgeable by nature, unlike passive, traditional media suckers.
Our readers, sometimes know as much as we do, often more.
If they are in doubt, they verify the information.
They do not need to believe what we publish, they can evaluate their interest and knowledge of the subject and validate it for themselves.
When they send us valuable feedback, that we incorporate in our editorial line, we achieve information interactivity.
But what would these big media corp CEO's know about this?
Very little, or nothing.
The above notion is totally alien to the soldiers of global media empires, which are so corrupt that they have lost track of their own inadequacy and decadence, that becomes
increasingly apparent at the light of the magnitude and transparency of online
information.
So, in order to reinforce their own self-belief, the big guys have teamed up to work together towards common standards for online publishing: twelve known content brands are launching the Online Publishers Association (OPA), a new industry trade organization representing the interests of high-quality online publishers before the advertising community, the press, the government and the public.
But there was nobody there today to take our questions, and email bounced...
Founding members of OPA are - guess who - CBS MarketWatch, CNET Networks, Conde Net, ESPN.com, The Industry Standard, KnightRidder.com/Real Cities, MSNBC.com, New York Times Digital, Salon Media Group, USATODAY.com, Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive and Wall Street Journal Online.
Where have I heard those names before?
Aren't many of them the same brands who have been giving out much of the irrelevant, manipulated and biased schmaltzy information since the media universe began?
"Members of OPA represent the highest standards in Internet publishing with respect to editorial quality and integrity, credibility, and accountability".
Don't make me laugh.
On the internet, the world wild web, 'quality of information' acquires an entire new meaning, and I am afraid this time it's my standards against theirs.
www.online-publishers.org
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Magnoliacom
Newsvine
Furl
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
Comments
Post new comment