Some call them vloggers, some call them founders, those who build their following and buy youtube subscribers, some call them YouTubers. Whatever you opt to call them, there is no denying that YouTube celebrities are around the rise. This season particularly, YouTubers have gone from being teenage time-passers to interviewing the president and scoring important marketing deals. However, with the greater emphasis on youthful, lively web presences, an individual has to wonder whether the profession–and yes, even some YouTubers can manage to create films fulltime –is one which poses a danger to traditional journalism.
When the founders interviewed President Obama before this season (previously) –that obtained over 3.4 million viewpoints — many believed it had been a slap-in-the-face to journalists that weren’t being encouraged to do so. An interview with the US President is an instant, and after years of composing and education, many never do undergo this kind of interview.
Obama’s victory with his participation strategy has increased the questions Youtubers’ growth currently giving way?
“I think it’s reasonable to say there’s a blurring of lines and those spaces in between what we think of as a conventional journalist, and also of different individual publishing material on Youtube will find somewhat vaguer,” says Dieter Bohn, executive director of The Verge.
A press reporter for politico, Hadas Gold, agrees. She states that its journalism’s definition has changed in the last ten years.
“We have been seeing this tendency throughout the previous ten decades of the taxpayer reporter blurring online,” says Gold.
However, the tendency will not negate the need for journalism.
“I believe the typical man goes to some well-respected news outlet to be able to receive their news.”
Instead, Gold says she considers the Youtubers’ meeting with Obama is reminiscent of a new type of ‘infotainment’ which is emerging, which she asserts, is a means for significant issues to be shared with young people in ways they know and can love.
“If you went to speak to some of these, they would not consider themselves journalists,” Gold continues. “They consider themselves characters in the same manner that Ellen DeGeneres does not consider herself a journalist.”
Kayley Melissa is a Youtube hair channel’s owner. She describes herself to become an “enthusiastic customer of the movie and conventional content,” and agrees with all Gold’s viewpoints. Melissa states that the Youtubers meeting with the President is reminiscent of a landscape that is digital also that it was a selection for the White House.
“For my generation — 18 to 26, 27, 28 or so — we are pleased with both. We are pleased to consume media and equally Youtube. I believe those who are younger are more into Youtube since what’s going so electronic,” explains Melissa.
“That is where the viewer is currently. The teens whom I understand, when they get home they start up their notebooks. I believe if you would like to reach people where they are, and also the crowd since they’re growing to a target market, you have to know where they are.”
Melissa adds that the idea of ‘infotainment’ is not a brand new one. It’s one that’s been persistent for decades even centuries.
“For young people aged 12-18, infotainment is likely to be the most powerful and that would have been true when I was that era too,” she states. “As you get older, you usually select things more critically.”
Melissa is accurate. Perhaps facets of journalism and the key to the technology is that none of this is new.
There was a time when print journalism jeopardized. The two co-existed. Tv emerged and that has been considered a hazard. That discovered equilibrium and eventually carved out its niche.
Journalists have felt threatened by the rise of bloggers — people who write information and might get on the internet, without an official news outlet. The significance of blogging was discovered by the media.
Dieter Bohn agrees. He states that the key for journalists to handle technologies that are emerging is understanding how.
“I would like to wring my hands and state journalism is dead and we do not want journalists since we are just putting things on Twitter and Youtube, but I believe we could have,” he states.
So while Youtube might be disguised to journalists as a danger, it’s can behave as a different instrument to.
Only time will tell how journalism will probably change due to Youtube. It appears the profession hasn’t yet been murdered by the stage. It has evolved another measure.