The new director of global news at BBC recently told the organization’s journalists that they either need to embrace social media channels or find jobs elsewhere (good luck with that, Luddites). In an in-house publication, Peter Horrocks said, “This isn’t just a kind of fad…I’m afraid you’re not doing your job if you can’t do those things. It’s not discretionary.” It may sound harsh (particularly if spoken with a British accent), but he must have sensed resistance and deemed a mandate necessary.
It’s not news that many journalists and publications are using social media channels to broaden their reach. We recently met with an executive from Meredith Publishing (Better Homes & Gardens and Ladies Home Journal are among their many titles) who told us their Twitter feeds are often the top drivers of traffic to their destination sites. I believe the line between “traditional” journalism and social media will continue to blur to the point of non-existence. There are a lot of hungry journalists out there and it seems those who understand the need to diversify the distribution of their content (not to mention better communicate with their sources, peers and audiences) will endure.
Of course, we still need to resolve how media outlets will make money going forward. Or there will be no journalists to fire.
I am so glad you posted this. Some journalists are still afraid of the Internet, but it’s here–and that won’t soon change. The challenge is figuring out how to make all this social-networking work for us.
Social Media is a necessary component to journalism. If a working journalist feels “forced” to blog, tweet, get a page on Facebook or any combination of the three…they should really consider getting into a new field.