The Double-Edged Sword of Technology in Journalism
A couple of weeks after a crippling attack on Sony’s computer system resulted in the release of thousands of internal documents, people are beginning to spread the blame.
A story in Re/code cites Hollywood’s aversion to technology as a factor in the depth of the attack, which has prompted incessant media coverage. Prominent Hollywood figures, such as Judd Apatow, lambasted the press for reporting on this subject. We are aiding the hackers, in the eyes of the Apatow school.
Sony began mounting a counter attack over the weekend in a similar vein, employing the age-old ‘blame the media’ strategy with a letter from lawyer David Boies and an op-ed penned by Aaron Sorkin.
Both parties make valid points, though I am not sure Hollywood’s aversion to technology has anything to do with this hack. Hackers can penetrate any system if they set their mind to it, as security experts have reminded me of late.
We still don’t know precisely why this happened, but I would venture to guess that it does not principally derive from Hollywood’s frustration with Google.
Moreover, those who sanctify technology must acknowledge its diffusion has amplified the media’s role in the dissemination of the purloined documents.
It has never been easier to access protected files, steal those files and distribute them widely. You can do it without revealing your identity. It’s also never been easier for millions of people to access this information at the same time.
We live in an era where everyone can play the role of journalist, and we have been handed a story befitting of this age.
The hackers posted information online for anyone to access. They did not select a storyteller; they are relying on the media’s competitive nature to spread the gospel.
We are all playing along, and what else are we to do? Watch as an anonymous blog publishes bombshell after bombshell? Idealism has its limits.
The media has not deviated from the norm. The press’ job is to report on the facts as we see fit, and there is a lot of information for people to rifle through. This is not the same as the nude photo leak, where some hacked into a celebrity’s private files. These are emails sent by officials of a public company from their corporate accounts.
We could be more judicious with some of this information. Reporting would be restrained if if only one publication, like The New York Times, had access to the documents. Yet the same could be said for every story, and many media critics deride the Times for its adherence to a a more traditional style.
If we glorify reporters at Buzzfeed for how they use social media to report and market their wares, we can’t then vilify them for using social media and other digital tools to amplify their reporting on a major story. And this is a major story.
Relevant inside information, when placed in the hands of the modern-day media, boundless and insatiable, prompts a feeding frenzy. This is exactly what the hackers wanted, and sometimes we must admit when someone else is in control.
