-
Website
http://www.mathewingram.com/work -
Original page
http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/09/12/twittering-a-funeral-why-not/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
scrawledinwax
23 comments · 1 points
-
webomatica
35 comments · 5 points
-
howardlindzon
46 comments · 69 points
-
JoeDuck
57 comments · 1 points
-
Karoli
32 comments · 39 points
-
-
Popular Threads
-
In defence of newspapers and serendipity
2 weeks ago · 43 comments
-
Are independent bloggers an endangered species?
2 weeks ago · 8 comments
-
Bloggers, trust, MSM and correction fluid
1 week ago · 2 comments
-
Why media outlets want Facebook Connect
2 weeks ago · 1 comment
-
First Read: Follow the Breadcrumbs : CJR
2 weeks ago · 1 comment
-
In defence of newspapers and serendipity
There's another, under-reported issue. Looking at the screenshot on SVI, the reporter's Tweets were totally banal and ordinary. What value did Twittering the event that way deliver? What did his 'readership' need to know in real time? The normalcy of his tweets suggests that it was more of a stunt than an exercise in reportage.
If it was a family member Twittering the funeral, that'd be a bit concerning. You might say to them: "Dude, try to be in the moment". But assuming the event is worth reporting on, then there's nothing wrong with the reporter doing it. Though I'm not sure what value there really is in realtime updates at a funeral (you pretty much know what's going to happen). Still, that's a totally different issue.
I think the real reason people are freaked out is that they're projecting: In that reporter, they see themselves -- Twittering everywhere, even in situations where it might be unnecessary, superfluous, or vaguely inappropriate.
What I did find inappropriate and journalistically questionable was the ABC reporter's inadvertant admittance that her blog bookmark list consists entirely of journalism shoptalk sites and the Daily Kos.
Ian Lamont
The Industry Standard
I think the difference is the fact that a reader chooses to open the paper and read a story. The nature of twitter is that it "pushes" the story to you, and you can't really choose to read or not read particular tweets. This person's followers were subjected to these details, and their option would be to completely unfollow this person, or receive the play-by-play of this funeral.
So what's the alternative? It's hard to say, other than perhaps to question if twitter is robust enough to support this sort of information. I think hashtags are a great way for people to follow particular stories, but they're generally for opting-in, not out (that is, I could choose to follow everyone twittering about "osufootball" but I can't choose to block everyone twittering about "childfuneral".
I just think twitter is simply a new communication channel and the etiquette still needs to be worked out. The "push" versus "pull" of information is just a different paradigm that people haven't become accustomed to..
That said, I think that anyone who decides that a child's funeral is the place to "push the new media envelope" is completely lacking in any kind of judgment or sensitivity. I know from direct experience that the death of a child is just different from any other kind of event.