I was one of the lucky ones. Located in an evacuation zone, I didn’t evacuate. Didn’t think the storm would amount to much, until I noticed the Hudson River coming over its banks at about 9:30AM Monday morning, some 11 hours before the highest expected tide. By then, my car was locked in the garage that would become its coffin. But I digress.
Like many, I was glued to the TV and my second screen (iPhone) paying attention to what was happening outside. Grateful for the respite from the election, I was watching these silly news casters knee deep in water talking about the drama of the situation. Then, I’d shift to Facebook1 to get the “real” story from my friends.
By the time the storm was over, the real story was worse than you could imagine. I stayed glued to social media outlets through the weekend, but mostly gave up on news media except to get a consolidated list of logistics (when power was coming back, what parking/traffic rules were in effect, etc.). I couldn’t help but notice that the news media needed to invent drama. People defending their homes with bows-and-arrows or stories about how “NJ-ians were helping each other, but NY-ers were not” (Bullshit, by the way.).
The real story was on Twitter.
The real story was social-communication with my friends on Facebook. A virtual shoulder to lean on, if you will. (Do people still use the word “virtual”?)
I’ve been around social for a while. I have a particular fascination for the cultural effects of technology on (individual and group) behavior. I know how Twitter is credited for a role in the Arab Spring, and how Facebook is being used to fight bullying. But, this is the first time I noticed the contrast between the authentic connections that social media creates vs the backdrop of manufactured drama created by the news media.
I can’t help but wonder if Hurricane Sandy ends up being some sort of turning point from old-media to new, as we pivot to authenticity. I’m excited by the possibilities of authentic media driving communications and relationships. Could become very satisfying.
Update November 8, 2012:
Transparency drives accountability. Look at some of the fall-out.
NJ Under-Sheriff Resigns Over Generator. He used a town generator to power his home during the storm.
NY State Disaster Response Chief Fired for Using Disaster Response Crew to Clear his Driveway. Hard to tell from the article, but sounds like this asshole wasn’t even using the house at the time.
- Because this was local, I found Facebook — where I have ‘real’ friends — to be more helpful than Twitter. [↩]
Amen bro.…said many times this election would be the tipping point away from Main street media. Sandy doused the waning fire leaving flickering embers. So-Media gave us back the human experience that was lost among opinion from traditional news outlets.
It was just so obvious (to me) in the storm that they’d manufacture drama so they had something to talk about. They looked comical.
Dave,
interesting perspective. It’s always been true to some degree media presents what sells, not what’s really happening. However this has been getting worse and worse as media’s position has declined. You mention authentic, that’s a meaningful term, so is verified. If someone I know says something, it has far more credibility.
What FB, Twitter, Blogs, email, etc., have done, is make it infinitely easier to remain in contact with a large number of people and to get “first hand” input from them about what is happening.
Sandy presented one example of this. Today’s election presents a second. If you follow Nate Silver, (http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/) this election is not close and other than right after the first debate, it has never really been close. But to hear the media talk about it, this election is too close to call.
As I write this, no one knows the results of the election, but if the election is a landslide (i.e. Obama wins more than 300 Electoral Votes), what does that say about independent writers with high name recognition (Fareed Zakaria, Nicholas Kristof for example) who continually peddle rubbish about the election being close?
Either they don’t believe in basic research (check a blog dedicated to tracking election polling) or they are shilling to sell, truth be damned.
What exacerbates mainstream media’s slide into irrelevance? Named reporters who either don’t believe in doing basic, simple research or who’ll publish what they know if rubbish just to garner attention (and maybe sales).
Good riddance.
Hey Andy!
I chose the word “authentic” very specifically. There is a movement around living more authentically, or living from your heart that I agree with, and believe elevates our life-experience. I think there is a social trend to live more authentically in many aspects of our lives, my observation around media being just one.
You bring up an interesting point, and one that speaks to transparency. In the past, the media was the a main way we knew about things, or a main way ideas were shared and spread. The rapid spread of social communications provides transparency. It’s not perfect, as we saw with all the fake photos of Sandy, but it’s getting better.
I have always believed that social communications is more important than “just sharing what you’re eating with your closest 1,000 friends” — it’s driven my work with Where’s Your Heart? Foundation. What’s starting to happen is like a lot of different ripples on the same lake, they’re starting to magnify each other… creating waves that are even visible from the shore. Interesting times.