Some edited highlights from a BBC focus group of 19-39-year-olds:
*very clear understanding of what they wanted from Facebook (Twitter barely mentioned)
*sophisticated appreciation of the image they projected through FB… most used it for both personal and professional reasons
*used it on both their mobiles and their PCs, but to do different things. Mobile usage is about need; PCs about choice and pleasure
*all saw comment and discussion as a key component of enjoying news on FB
*very mixed view too on what kind of news should be posted by news organisations on FB (light vs serious). Most accepted that it was probably a good idea for media organisations to ‘put it all out there’ and let people pick and choose for themselves.
Having said that, nobody really believed what they read on Facebook, even if it had mainstream media branding all over it. If they wanted to know about a particular story, they would go directly to a mainstream media website either first, or via FBdelicious links , add a comment
On a documentary about Neda Agha Soltan, who was shot in demonstrations in Tehran last summer (BBC College of Journalism blog):
“The home video feel of the conversations with her mother, sister and father meshes well with the footage from the streets filmed on mobile phones and uploaded to You Tube and Facebook.
The film has gone viral in Iran with the active support of HBO. So far it’s not been seen on British television, but you can watch it on You Tube.
After a recent screening at the Frontline Club in London, its director, Anthony Thomas, answered questions.
…the wider audience is far more accepting of You Tube quality footage than documentary buffs might think. It is now the raw material of news and therefore of documentaries – and Thomas and his team made great use if it.
When even a highly-produced programme like the BBC’s Imagine includes an interview with Canadian writer Margaret Atwood on Skype, in its recent profile of Diana Athill, you know that shift is permanent.”