The Future of News is EPIC?

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.broom.org/epic/' target='_blank'>http://www.broom.org/epic/</a><br /><br /></div><i>"In the year 2014, the New York Times has gone offline. The Fourth Estate's fortunes have waned. What happened to the news? And what is Epic?"</i><br /><br /><img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/web/2003/epic.gif" /><br /><br />This is one of the more thought-provoking Flash presentations I've seen - no dancing hamsters, no talking heads, just a very evocative look at the future of media. It's kind of eerie - I could see much of this coming to pass. Give it a watch and share your comments - what does the future hold for media, both in how it's consumed and how it's created?

[OSUKid7]

Ah, saw that a few months ago. Yes, very good flash movie, but I wonder how much of it will actually happen.

[Alpha2004]

none of it will happen

they made this (imo) partially to warn us that self made news is not necessarily true news, even though epic is what people perceive as being ideal.

[lowair]

Appealing....yet disturbing..

The news I want to hear...cool

Just the news I want to hear...hhmmmm

[yslee]

Interesting, the example of the ID card has the name of Winston Smith.

Extremely thought provoking, thanks for the link. My first thought is that such a service will serve to increase the polarity of opinions.

[sp0om]

That was pretty damn cool. Thanks for sharing it :)

[SteveHoward999]

Hmmmm - being the cynic that I am, I doubt things will turn out like that. They will be much worse. But not on such grand scale. Not everyone is so durned gullible, but certainly America will be more likely to fall for it than anywhere else ... it is already a land of commercial slaves. Ever tried watching tv over here?

I timed some programs the other day while visiting the mother-in-law (we don't have tv at home, because US tv is such utter crap most of the time). 5 minutes of adverts, 5 minutes of programming. Each 5 minutes of programming was 2 minutes of re-cap, 2 minutes of content, and one minute of "coming up next". This was for a range of programs/channels from Discovery to home improvement .... I couldn't face even 30 seconds of soaps so I don't know if they are worse or better.

OK I'll get down off my soap box now ... &lt;puff, pant ...>

[RobertCF]

Interesting concepts. I found it laughable they actually used the phrase "journalist ethics", which nowaday is complete fiction in most of the major markets. How funny that traditional news objected to the polarizing, shallow, sensationalism of Epic....the pot calling the kettle black, really.

Okay, I don't doubt that in some fashion "dynamic pseudo-news" will come about. We're pretty much there now. But have you actually tried to read some loser's blog? And why? Talk about boring stuff. I don't see the attraction in either writing them or reading them. Snoozeroonie, total and complete.

There will be a place for that stuff simply because we DO have a society that actually likes to what stupid "reality" shows (get a frelling LIFE, will you people? Stop living off of soap operas!). But the rest of us who have a lot more convolutions in our gray matter will stick to, and be very discriminating in our consumption of, hard news. I can usually tell if a "news story" is really that anchor's editorial or real news. Dan Rather, case in point.

If we actually approach anything like what that interesting piece of flotsam, there was one part I found probably more accurate is that the public will be polarized. The well-connected, but totally clueless, and the somewhat connected intelligentsia.

You know, as I think about it, those in the first group stand the greatest chance of becoming the "energizer bunnies" in The Matrix. Since their reality will be totally fictional, they wouldn't know when they suddenly crossed the threshold into submersion into fantasy.

Hmmm.

[bjornkeizers]

Interesting concepts. I found it laughable they actually used the phrase "journalist ethics", which nowaday is complete fiction in most of the major markets.


Hold it right there... Being a student-journalist myself as well as a mass-consumer of all things media, I would like to point out that the vast majority of journalists and their mediums are still very much ethical.

Unethical behaviour is the exception, not the rule. Journalists in general are very much aware of the privileged position they have and the trust and responsibility that goes with it.

It is one of the first things they teach any new journalist, and we're also required to take classes on ethics and have regular debates about our role as a journalist, whether it be about ethics vs. demographics, observing reporter vs. activist (like we did just two days ago)... Ethics is one of guiding principles!

[shawnc]

This was very interesting, um, entertainment. Very well made with a feel of eery realism. I doubt that it will ever come to that (maybe that's the optimist in me) but I can certainly see someone making the case. Just look at the increasing popularity of sensationalist television and print reporting. Look at how much interest we have in the sordid details of the lives of entertainers and folks in the public eye. The news that an increasing number of people in our society find important is disturbing.

Having said that, I still don't think things will come to what this presentation is suggesting. But very interesting nonetheless.

[alabij]

Very nice animation. Much of it is already in effect. Google is on it's way to dominate news. However Google gets its news from the active news media. EPIC is real and here. Most news is sensational for americans. Take a look at CNN and CNNI.
While CNNI deals with issues from all over the world, the domestic CNN talks or shows heroic acts of saving cats from trees. I am really worried about America when it comes to news. We are so disinformed and illinformed that its scary. Like I said to test this watch CNN and CNNI side by side.
On the issue of blogs. I don't read blogs. Most of them are so boring and have little or no incite in issues.

[fireflyrsmr]

I can not imagine allowing any single organization know that much about me that they could target me with that kind of precision and completness. Maybe enough other people are more trusting of society but the reaction to spy software tells me there is a chance for us.

[capo]

I enjoyed the animation but I find reading the reactions to it more interesting (and more unsettling) than the animation itself. Polarization? I guess maybe...

-----------------------
"what is truth?" - Pontius pilate

[shawnc]

While CNNI deals with issues from all over the world, the domestic CNN talks or shows heroic acts of saving cats from trees. I am really worried about America when it comes to news. We are so disinformed and illinformed that its scary. Like I said to test this watch CNN and CNNI side by side.

You know what, this is an excellent point. While on vacation this summer I was amazed at the substantial difference in CNNI vs CNN. The breadth of significant information that is imparted on CNN pales in comparision to CNNI. I used to watch CNN daily. I don't think I've watched in one time since returning from vacation. Not having anything to compare CNN to, I didn't realize just how little news they actually reported on. After a week of CNNI, I now know.

[Yahdie]

...the domestic CNN talks or shows heroic acts of saving cats from trees. I am really worried about America when it comes to news. We are so disinformed and illinformed that its scary. Like ......no incite in issues.

I really enjoyed the hours of coverage of Mt. St. Helens occasionally belching steam just before Election Day. Not only was the subject matter important and relevant, it was journalism at its best, watching the reporter, on scene, running out of things to say, while nothing much happened.

[Kt3]

What most of you fail to realize is that the news was always slanted. Ethical journalism is an ideal that serves as a guide for journalists, it is not commonly practiced and it is impossible to adhere to 100%. If anything, things have been getting better. The fact that you're all aware of this in itself is a product of the wonderful age we live in (information age) and its impact on the individual's ability to more accurately perceive the world around them. 80 years ago you would have had no easy to way to check facts, discuss them with others, and your news sources were more limited.

I don't know about you but I read news from a variety of sources. In fact, I'll go to the other guy and read their side of things just to make sure I'm getting the whole story. So it all boils down to what you want. If you care to get the whole story, you can. If you're closed minded and go after the news you like to hear, then you'll remain ignorant. Smart people may get smarter, but morons will always be morons.

Even then, I know that I'm still not seeing 100% of the complete picture. But that's alright, because I know it's still way better than anything available before the internet.


Kt

[shawnc]

What most of you fail to realize is that the news was always slanted. Kt

Well thank you old wise one for showing us lost sheep the error of our ways :roll: .

[Kati Compton]

You know, I don't like getting Amazon recommendations without asking, and I don't think I would want my news collected for me using an algorithm I'm not in control of. I like to decide things for myself...

[jkendrick]

Most of us already do some of this voluntarily. It's called RSS feeds and we aggregate news on the topics we want to follow. Blogs are the primary source of information for most RSS feeds and news aggregation and they are by nature "biased" in attitude if not in "facts". I can see a good portion of this prediction beginning to evolve already. Very interesting look toward the future.