ConvoTrack Tweeting our moral compass — Danny Whatmough.com

Tweeting our moral compass

Paul Carr is at it again. The notorious columnist, who I have written about before, has authored one of his NSFW opinion pieces on TechCrunch covering the recent Fort Hood shootings. It’s a long post but worth a read.

Suw Charman-Anderson has written an interesting reply in which she pulls Carr up on some rather glaring factual inaccuracies:

This is not, however, a reflection on social tools so much as it is a reflection of human nature: Some of what gets done with social media is good and some is bad. This is not news, nor new.

Suw’s post is well researched, but it also misses the underlying debate which Carr starts (these are, as usual, obscured somewhat by the sheer length and often rambling nature of his post). A debate that I think is both relevant and important.

There is a debate here to be had about ethics, about our social moral compass. There is a debate to be had about citizen journalism and its value. There is a debate here to be had about the role of journalism and the increasing speed in which so-called pro journalists are overly eager to jump on any tweet and big it up into front page news (read: Stephen Fry).

I agree with Suw: this is not a debate about the social tools, it is a debate about the realities of humanity and society (and journalism) that these tools reveal. Back to Carr:

As I’ve already said – and I’m even starting to bore myself now – the answer isn’t censorship (which won’t work), but rather in our social evolution catching up with the state of technology. We need to get back to a point as a society where – without thinking – we put our humanity before our ego.

For me, there are three big takeaways here:

1. We all need to stop and think before we tweet

2. We all need to stop and think before we read a tweet (and respond and write about)

3. The news industry (and I include Carr here) needs to get back to rigorous fact checking and investigative journalism, otherwise it won’t survive

Social tools and their immediacy are incredibly powerful – used rightly and wrongly – and this is something that we all often forget. The wisdom of the crowd can easily turn sour…

If we are all to become citizen jounalists, then don’t we need to try and adopt (or put in place some of our own) some of the ethics to which journalists should subscribe?

(hat tip to Eb, Suw and Euan)

picture credit

Related Posts with Thumbnails
http://www.dannywhatmough.com/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/digg_32.png http://www.dannywhatmough.com/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/stumbleupon_32.png http://www.dannywhatmough.com/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/delicious_32.png http://www.dannywhatmough.com/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/technorati_32.png http://www.dannywhatmough.com/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/google_32.png http://www.dannywhatmough.com/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/facebook_32.png http://www.dannywhatmough.com/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/twitter_32.png

Category: social media | Tags: , , Comments

  • My main aim wasn't to address the underlying issues that Carr skirts around because I was more concerned with the factual errors in his post. I could have gone on to address the deeper problems with citizen journalism etc., but that would have turned my post into a bit of a mammoth essay! I certainly agree that they are important issues that we need to discuss and address but my post was ever intended to do that.

    However, I would say that the discussion around citizen journalism has been going on for the best part of the last decade. It started in earnest after 9/11 in the US, after 7/7 in the UK, then again after the Buncefield petrol depot fire, the Virginia Tech shootings, the Burmese protests, the Iranian elections. Carr is not only late to the party, he's also arrived without a bottle of wine and didn't bring dessert - he just doesn't add anything new, nor does he provide any additional or useful insight.

    Eb is right - Carr's idea that social media is corrupting humanity in some way is fallacious, relying mainly on the "slippery slope fallacy". It's also an argument that has been made throughout history, every time someone comes up with a new idea. As is so often quoted, Plato bemoaned the invention of writing, but it hasn't done us too badly!
  • Thanks for stopping by guys.

    Suw - apologies if I seemed overly critical of your not discussing the 'deeper points' - I really am very impressed by the detail of your post - detail that is so often missing in blog posts.

    I fear that we are probably in furious agreement on most of this.

    The issue is an important one in my mind and I credit Carr (despite the shocking inaccuracies) for bringing it to light again, even if, as you point out, this is hardly a new debate.

    If Carr's fundamental point is that social media is corrupting humanity (I don't think it is btw - http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/11/11/paul-carr-...) then he is wrong. The issue that I find much more interesting is the effect that all this instant non-fact-checked news we receive from citizen journalists is having on society and professional journalism.

    I don't have the answers, but am enjoying the debate!
  • eadeyeri
    Good post and certainly agree with your three takeaways. My main bone of contention with Carr piece was that he seems to allude to social media worsening humanity. I would argue that it only highlights human flaws that have existed since time began. Perhaps this is the point that Carr is making as well but for me it does resemble a 'technology will cause the downfall of man' argument.

    An assessment of how we put our humanity before our ego will differ from one person to the next as we don't all have the same moral compass pointing in the direction.

    I think having the tools around is a good thing because it allows us to know what humanity is really like warts and all.
blog comments powered by Disqus

↑ Back to top