This article from AFP describes how the epic event of Michael Jackson’s death resulted in the worldwide public seeking and sharing information with each other as quickly as they possibly could - quicker than traditional media could possibly keep up with. So quickly, in fact, that even Google News thought that the volume of requests for information about his death was the result of a computer virus attack.

These days, we’re coming to expect information instantly when news happens; and our primary source of information has become other people… not the in-depth, thoughtful perspective of traditional media.

Which raises the bigger media studies questions about whether we’re sophisticated enough to filter the good and bad/reliable and unreliable sources of our information. Is our thirst for instant information overriding the ability to get *good* information? Are we allowing ourselves to be more susceptible to being fooled by rumors and misinformation?

There’s still a valuable place for in-depth, thoughtful reporting to give us the perspective that Twitter updates can’t. But, when epic events like Michael Jackson’s death happen… of course we want to know as much as we can right away. Instant, online communication is still pretty new, and I think we’re still figuring out the ideal balance of how we get our information.

I’m sure many thesis papers will go into this with greater depth than I am here.