The Press-Sphere

What does blogger Jeff Jarvis mean when he writes that the press is becoming the press-sphere? Well, to be honest, I'm not exactly sure. After swimming through his sentences and diagrams, I have gathered, more or less, that he believes the press is losing its handle on the control of the news. It is being replaced by, or perhaps, placed at competition with, all of today's numerous news sources. Some of these news sources are the media, the government, large companies, our peers, links to background or various information, work, and search. (I'm assuming he means search engines, but your guess is as good as mine.) As you can see, the press is now only a small piece of the news-circulating puzzle. At the end of his blog, Jarvis sums up the shift in the news world by saying that news today is "bigger. . . It’s more complex. It moves over time. It’s more about process than product. It has no limit of sources and handlers and distributors and curators and perspectives." It seems to me that Jarvis is okay with this adapted style of news. After all, it is exciting (and more fair to the public) to have so many sources of information.

The only downfall I see in this is that news can now almost never be received without also receiving a complementary opinion. The news, it seems, is almost always biased. Whether written, spoken, or visually presented, we can pick up the attached undertone of a piece of news. We can know by some one's use of language, their facial expressions, the tone of their voice, etc just what they think about the subject they're relaying to us. So, to me, the new press-sphere Jarvis describes makes it difficult for anyone to think for themselves or form their own, immediate opinions. On the other hand though, the new press-sphere's wide variety of sources ensures, as I mentioned before, that we will receive more than just one opinion of the news. So, while we may initially be thinking in the terms of another and borrowing the ideas of our peers, I think in the end we will have formed a more educated opinion and be sure of our own, final stance. (I really just talked myself in circles there. Sorry about that. Hopefully it made some sense.)

One minor note I'd like to make in regards to Jarvis' post is that I think it would have been helpful for the reader if he had defined what the 'press' was, or who it comprised. That would have helped me, at least. That's all I have to say about that.