Subscribe to MarineBizTV's twitter feed today, and see the future of shipping news
By Ryan Skinner (email)
The future of (shipping) news is misspelled, grammatically incorrect and ripped off. Why do I say that? Because it's right and good. Because, to be frank, the real world has poor syntax and the real world proceeds without regards to copyrights. It's evolution's guiding principle: Whatever works.
MarineBizTV's twitter feed gives the perfect illustration of this future. Even twitterati accustomed to seeing words and grammar rules sacrificed to the 140-character limit commandment would gag on some of MarineBizTV's 4th grade errors. Some examples:
"Japan to grow more stronger: "Hamburg Sud container vessel..."
"Skate, the first marine fish to face extinction: France:" (how many fish aren't marine?)
"French yacht ceased at Kochi Port: The CISF ceased a French yacht..." (seizure means trouble; getting ceased must be fatal)
When you consider that it's a news service, the errors seem even more egregious. But, to most readers around the world, the response is this: Who cares? Even those who notice the errors are more likely to say "just give me the news. Quick. Dirty. I don't care. I just want to know."
And you know what? They're right. "But it may lead to misunderstandings!" whine the crowd who worry through books like Eats, Shoots and Leaves (panda or hit-man?). H*ll, no, I say. Anyone who can't tell the difference between a panda and a hit-man through context is an idiot. In the examples cited above, the errors are no hindrance to get the meaning. And grade-school teachers can stuff it. The future is mispeled.
The second futuristic aspect of this feed is its absolute disregard for source. These stories come from all over the place, and the twitter feed gives no indication of source. Click-through and you'll be linked on to the source or led to MarineBizTV's own page (with source accreditation).
"But," shouts the editor of a big, musty flagship publication, "they won't know whether to believe what they're reading if there's no accreditation. How do they know the source is reliable?" That's dead wrong, and backwards-thinking. People are pretty savvy readers. Savvier than most publishers would like to think.
Readers want information and news, and they want it all, from every direction. Then they digest it all themselves. This is one future of (shipping) news: Rich, loud and scratchy.