Redefining news, re-valuing journalists. And loving what's local

I'm a news snob and a news addict. Can't get enough of the stuff. But what I classify as news these days (or rather, what I pay attention to) is rapdily changing. It's getting so much more personal, and I'm getting so much more discerning.

I don't think it's my age. Rather, I think it's the way that I get my news.

If was David Armano I'd be able to graph my news intake over the years - from working in press offices and gladly reading all of the papers every day, through to now: doing the equivalent of copy tasting news from my Twitter community, or if I have time, RSS feeds. (If I have time?!) Reading a stack of newspapers is increasingly a luxury.

But as well as the way I receive news these days, the other radical difference is that I can now access much more news depending on my specific interests/people I follow on Twitter. But just because it's on Twitter, doesn't mean it's true.

Rory Cellan Jones (@ruskin147)[UPDATE - CORRECTED] posted today on the role of Twitter in reporting the events in Mumbai. I couldn't agree more with his central point: journalists sift fact from fiction and present it in a way their audience (community?) can understand. Twitter can be a fantastic alert mechanism, but the crowd is not always truly wise.

Unless... unless that crowd is the one which posts on Stroudgreen.org/I *heart* N4 - a fantastic local website/forum (hat tip Andy Martin /@firetail) which gives me extremely personal local news, commentary, advice and insight from my local community.

The site has recently been revamped. It's a work of genius. Every area should have one.