Guardian could be positive feedback with social media

Zoe Williams starts with advice not to join Twitter. Maybe the Guardian editor line is that all opinion has to be hostile to social media. But anyway she continues to suggest that " we could build an ethical code collectively" so there is some hope for the people lost in Twitter.

Previously Zoe Williams wrote about the Sunday Politics on BBC in a way that may chime with some on Twitter.

In the Corbyn era, many in the Labour party complained about the lack of balance, particularly on the Sunday Politics, the show’s weekend edition, where it was not unusual to have a panel of three journalists, one from the far right (the Express or the Telegraph), one from the “centre”, which broadly meant also supporting the government, and one from the “centre left”, who hated the leader of the Labour party more than the other two put together. 

Thing is, this "centre left" point of view might be close enough to the Guardian. Some of us can remember how Corbyn has been covered in the newspaper.

Monday, Roy Greenslade started by facing up to a few facts. He considers how much or little has changed with print journalism since the internet arrived and people like Jeff Jarvis started writing about citizen journalism.

So, how did we, the MSM professionals, react? Did we change? Did we clean up our act? Did we take those thousands of critical below-the-line comments to heart? My reading of the national morning newspapers over the past decade suggests not. Newspaper publishers and editors have continued to believe they are the political, social and cultural agenda-setters. Despite the fact that newsprint sales have fallen by more than 50% since the turn of the millennium, they have been consoled by huge online numbers.

My guess is that existing newspapers are very unlikely to change their model now. Something else could come later that realises the web is read / write. Will there be a news event as circulation falls another 50%. Possibly just lower costs, more shocking opinion.

Greenslade claims that the online alternative to MSM is now "a nasty, brutish, hysterical, intolerant mob" but I wonder if this is true? Maybe some of the people known as the people who previously paid for newspapers can continue as reasonably polite occasional retweeters of various links.

Roy Greenslade convincing on Trump and UK newspapers

Today Roy Greenslade comments on the way that some UK newspapers have supported Donald Trump during his recent visit.  Greenslade suggests this "can be traced to Boris Johnson’s claim five weeks ago that Trump could handle Brexit better than May". My impression is that the change is also part of the consequences of May taking a firmer line on the consequences of Brexit. The newspapers have had to face up to complexity and some loss of momentum. Trump has provided some energy over 48 hours that is not yet much examined, at least in the news world.

Newspapers are already switching to a betrayal story about Brexit to explain the lack of delivery. Sunday Express front page for example. Connecting to Trump  style as a solution may appeal as a story. I have dropped the #tag #BlameTheresatheAppeaser as #Betrayal and #May finds enough now on twitter to track what is happening.

On the opinion pages, Matthew d'Ancona considers the current problems for Theresa May and concludes with an alarming possibility.

Never underestimate the populist right, especially when being assisted by US and Russian sympathisers. Its principal protagonists have curated the “Brexit betrayal myth”: the claim that the British volk has been let down by a craven elite of multiculturalists and theatre-goers. Some of their number argue that Ukip should be revived under Nigel Farage. But the more dangerous plan is to colonise the battered Tory movement in the years to come – like a facehugger from Alien – flooding local associations with like-minded members, and turning the party of Disraeli, Macmillan and Churchill into a Trumpite nationalist force.

Some Conservatives may want to keep some distance from UKIP but there was some overlap in themes as reported by newspapers during the referendum. See another blog Fleet Street in Europe and Cyberspace. Blog started before referendum so there are some links there.

I think it much more possible that UK newspapers that have promoted Brexit will now include Trump and supporters, maybe Boris maybe Farage. Roy Greenslade comments-

The Little Englander philosophy of the Brexit-backing press dovetails with build-the-wall, protectionist Trumpism.
In spite of the waning circulation of the national press, the populism it shares with its new poster boy, Trump, is on the rise: and it’s no exaggeration to suggest their philosophy amounts to a very real danger to democracy.

The press circulation is not only waning but concentrated with an older demographic. The BBC and other broadcast media tend to accept the news agenda from print and this may continue whatever happens to circulation. The Guardian should be supported in the print world as long as it lasts. Online there may be a wider range of styles. The Guardian believes in proper journalists and rarely credits a tweet with much sense. But there could be some connection around this sort of thing.

Social Media policy is coming from USA

Emily Bell writes about bias on Twitter and Facebook, seems to think the robots will not be up to doing an editor job. See previous posts for my views on Guardian Unlimited Talk and how the Guardian journalists blew out the potential of social media a while ago. More soon on citizen journalism and an update on OhmyNews.

But meanwhile this week is a good chance to check for USA situation sets things up for UK. We have some discussions on Brexit and a visit from Trump. Opinions vary on whether a lack of civility is a natural consequence of the web or whether Trump / Brexit introduced a new approach. Emily Bell seems to start with the authorities / Republican Party as compared with the liberals in the public who may make a large share of the posts. My guess is that in UK the journalists mostly report the Westminster situation, discussion inside the Conservative Party. Not so much reporting on Corbyn and supporters in social media. I still read the print Guardian most days so may have this wrong, maybe you find something else somewhere.

So some of the words / terms

toxic discourse (for instance at Twitter) 

platform enabling a far right presidency to consistently attack established democratic principles such as those of a free press 

human curators suppressed ratings for far-right news sources  

furore in the right-adjacent ranks 

violate hate-speech standards. It should be classified as fake news

Bell reports on some meetings that people from tech companies have had. Probability is that UK policy will follow.

On Dateline London this Saturday David Aaronovitch suggested that the UK right had normalised much new in recent years. This came up in conversation with Alex Deane and followed discussion about Brexit. I notice that UK tweets are often picking up on themes from the USA, not just retweets. Since the newspaper loss of influence became more obvious with the 2017 election there has been more activity with accounts such as Breitbart London, Westmonster and Leave.EU .  Possibly moreso this week.