I was very skeptical of Second Life when it was first presented to the class. I saw this virtual world as nothing more than a game for people who like to sit around their houses on the computer. The second day of discussion, along with the blogher forum have changed my mind. I believe that Second Life is something that is becomming necessary in a quickly changing technilogical world. There was no other way for a journalist to find a source from a specific place without going to that place, but Second Life has changed that. Now, with the help of Second Life, journalists can go in- world wherever they need to be. In class, the speaker told us she had wanted to go to a certain event in the real world, but she could not, so instead she went in Second Life and still had the experience. Although there is something to be said for physical presence, Second Life is a unique alternative.
In the blogher forum, Cybergirl Oh and 57 Miles both praised journamlism in-world. Cybergirl Oh talked about how when she finds a source in world it is very interesting because she has to wonder two things: What they are doing in Second Life? and What do they do in the real world? One of the problems with this is how does a journalist know the credibility of a source? An avotar is not necessarily an accurate represenation of the person. This is the reason why 57 Miles says having friends and belonging to groups in Second Life are such valuable connections.
I do not think in-world news will ever be able to supersede real world news mainly because not everyone is in-world. The real world news effects everyone, not just the nine million people in Second Life. This is the issue with Second Life and journalism for me because even though there is a large audience and many things to report on, there still seems to be limitations. An in-world journalist can be anywhere, anytime, but I still believe in the physical presence of a person. I think there would be a loss in journalism skills, if our only job was to teleport around Second Life.