Traditional and social media differ by institutional gatekeeping versus open reciprocity

Evidence

A brief note on terminology: While there exists decades of research into the evolution of media industries, from the earliest days of broadcast radio and television, to cross-media formats such as newspapers and print magazines, to contemporary digital formats such as websites and social media, throughout this book I use “traditional media” as a shorthand for these legacy media formats that are generally highly institutionalized, gatekept, hierarchical, and authoritative in the production and circulation of content, as opposed to the more accessible, reciprocal, interactive, open, and democratic uses of “social media.” — Crystal Abidin, Internet Celebrity, 55

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines the book’s working distinction between traditional and social media along gatekeeping and reciprocity axes.
• XREF: connects to: Social media ideology derives from the hacker ethic of sharing and DIY — Alice E. Marwick, Status Update: Celebrity, Publicity,…, 67; Traditional media are institutionalized and gatekept while social media are accessible and reciprocal; Generalized reciprocity outranks tit-for-tat as a social glue — Robert D. Putnam, Bowling Alone The Collapse and Revival…, 41 (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Traditional media are institutionalized and gatekept while social media are accessible and reciprocal #corroborates (1.00)
• Generalized reciprocity outranks tit-for-tat as a social glue #expands (0.70) — Robert D. Putnam, Bowling Alone The Collapse and Revival…, 41