The site offers reporters a place where they can post a question or story idea and ask for responses from knowledgeable sources. So you could pose the question, "I need advice on how to help people who are struggling to pay their mortgages" and expect to get some responses very quickly. The questions are emailed out three times a day and there are more than 23,000 sources who read them.
I'm not sure if this is a good or a bad thing. It changes the way reporters do the grunt work to get stories and can open them to finding sources who they otherwise might not meet. It may also enable journalists to connect with sources much faster.
I'm not sure what's to prevent a source from misrepresenting himself or overstating his expertise. Of course that can be a problem no matter how you get your information. Perhaps the biggest difference is that you're looking to people to be your sources who want to be your sources. There's not much room for people who have a story to tell but need some convincing that theirs is one that needs to be told. Put another way: Is the person who talks the most at a dinner party the most interesting person in the room? Time will tell.
No comments:
Post a Comment