Pazienza says the network fired him on the grounds that he violated its standards for journalists through his blog, Deus Ex Malcontent. He started his blog in may 2006 to "keep his mind sharp" while he was on a medical leave after an operation of a brain tumor.
I will not question whether the reasons for the CNN's decision were right or wrong or whether CNN's rules on employee writing were really "staggeringly vague and couldn't possibly apply to something as innocuous as a blog" as Pazienza says in his post on the end of his news career on CNN.
What would have happened if the newshouse like CNN accepted a different stand towards blogs? Do personal opinions of its staff really pose such a big threat to them?
Pazienza writes in its blog:
CNN fired me, and did it without even a thought to the power that I might wield as an average person with a brain, a computer, and an audience. The mainstream media doesn't believe that new media can embarrass them, hurt them or generally hold them accountable in any way, and they've never and they've never been more wrong.
In one of the previous posts I wrote: "It is interesting to see how traditional media is more and more prone to citizen journalism. But are they really open to ‘do it yourself’ media or do they just have to embrace them in order to keep and gain new audience?"
Is the answer still necessary?
Ni komentarjev:
Objavite komentar