Most of us are in the news business for the same reason that our newest blogger, Michelle Pletcher is: to make the world a better place. Of course, most of us hesitate to admit that, and I applaud Michelle for her courage.
Often we all think 'making the world a better place' comes from exposing corruption, speaking truth to power, or generally fighting injustice with the media's high beams. But while those might be the most obvious ways the news makes the world a better place, I think simple acts of community rememberance are actually more important -- things like our 'Fallen Sons,' project on this website.
The project is also our first big 'multimedia' project -- one where we weave together text, photos, and video to tell the story. It was gratifying to see what really seems to be the future of journalism in service of one of the great and original values of journalism, and I congratulate all the people who put it together -- I had very little to do with it.
I have read with pleasure all the comments supporting the families of our local heroes, but there haven't been any comments about the project itself -- which is not to say that there should have been. But this blog is really about journalism online -- what is sometimes referred (rather obnoxiously, I think) as journalism 2.0. So I want to know what people thought of the project as a early indicator of the future of journalism. What do you think multimedia means for the future of journalism? Do you like getting your news through several media at once?
Of course, the message is more important than the medium and good reporting is still good reporting, but the medium is still important too. What do you think the medium does to the message?