Part of what I’ll be doing when I start work at the Press next week is investigating social media usefulness for our business. And not just social media, but every viral, online, e-, HTML, FaceTwitterSpaceDigg, and .com resource that could pose as a promotional outlet.
It’s hilarious to see where the internet has come since its advent, which now seems so long ago. Anyone can access the vast aray of everything posted by virtually everyone. When I first voted more than four years ago, I can’t recall seeing so much fiery anti-governmental media being published at such an increasing rate. I saw the latest in a post on WordPress. It’s a faux advertisement for a new car, which actually bashes the “Green Revolution” and serves no other purpose than advertising the book Green Hell.
After reading various blogs and their comments and beginning to read the current research about the effects of social media, I often get discouraged about what social media is doing to journalism and the freedom inherent in the freedom of speech. It sometimes seems that the nobel purposes behind the free speech amendment have fallen below initial standards into the hands of characters who think they’re protected and able to annoy their neighbors by honking their horns.
It’s great to see the number of citizens openly concerned about governmental policy rising from day to day, but this increasing number means we all have to take care of the types of media we ingest. Just becuase something is lawful doesn’t always mean it’s ethical, and the more policy/political-figure bashing someone does, the more likely it is their public image is being tainted rather than their targets’. Just look at what’s happening to outspoken White-supremecist James W. von Brunn.
