Meikle part D

Open news doesn’t have the restriction of general news that often involves melodreamtic news. General day to day news of that considered ordinary has become less popular with well known news institutions BBC, SKY news etc, because of the increasing pressure to keep audiences enticed. Open news is quality because it “offer radical alternatives to mainstream debate” (Meikle) through it’s employment of realistic and day-to-day goings on. Individuals are given the ability to comment on what is troubling them, “everyone” apparently is a “journalist”(Meikle). They can comment on family troubles or nightmare next-door neighbours, the likes of Indymedia enables people “share.” What I will say is I think the comment about everyone is a journalist should be taken lightly yes like journalist everyone can comment. However the field of Journalism is extremely complicated and highly academic, not held by every open news commentator

However open news can often not involve quality, people can talk about essentially anything. For example the price of bake beans. Despite feeling that individuals have the right to express themselves, there are just certain things that people are not interested in and so people aren’t encouraged to participate in discussions because they appear boring. “Spam” etc are often found on these open sites, this can only draw away from open news as quality. Therefore I feel that Indymedia’s change from overly “open publishing” is a positive things because now any old rubbish can’t be contributed. But does anyone really have the right to constitute what is news?