Commentary – “Traditional journalism” in the digital age: NYT’s deal with Facebook  could change journalism forever.

The title says it all.

James Warren, Poynter’s chief media correspondent, alludes to the ambivalence coursing through the journalism community’s veins today, as the emotional barometer teetered between trepidation and jealousy.

The New York Times is like the cool, over-achieving kid in high school. You know the one – the class president, prom king, captain of every team, trend setter, and every teacher’s favorite.

Facebook is like the new kid who suddenly becomes popular because they’re new. Their cool kid façade overshadows questionable values and loose secret keeping skills. Facebook is the kid in high school you wanted to be friends because sitting next to them were cool by association.

When Facebook and The New York Times become friends the social hierarchy shifts so seismically that to outsiders merely looking in their direction as they sit together in the cafeteria is like looking at the sun – you know its a bad idea, but you want want to anyway.

But, just as much as everyone wants to be friends with the cool kids they are equally afraid of what might happen if they’re not. Not being friends, or at least associates, with the cool kids means being a social pariah.

Being a pariah isn’t a bad thing, per se. Pariahs can be free-thinking, creative-types who aren’t afraid to be whistle-blowers.

But when it comes to the business world being a pariah can cost people their jobs, their livelihoods, their lives.

No editor, or publisher for that matter, wants to be the one to put their staff out of a job.

Editors and publishers are like the parents who expect their kids to mature, learning and applying the tools they’ve been given, hopefully to change the world for the better. Sure, if their kids turn out to be “cool” that’s a bonus, but more than anything parents want their kids to have intelligence and integrity, and if that means not being cool, so be it.

Such is the dichotomy of editors and publishers. Intelligence and integrity first, popularity and coolness second.

Journalist used to be the cool kid.

We could hang out in the cafeteria with all the power players – politicians, celebrities and taste-makers. We knew people’s secrets and, when we were doing our jobs right, used them in a careful manner to do the right thing while protecting the source.

Our editors and publishers were proud of our intelligence and integrity, but they were extra proud that we were cool, too. Maybe, at times, we were jealous that The New York Times was the gold standard, the ultimate cool kid, the one that our parents wished we could be more like. But we didn’t care because we were cool by proxy.

Now, anyone can create a website and use social media. These are the “posers,” and there are a lot of posers. Sometimes these “posers” are authentic, would-be journalists who, for one reason or another, aren’t. But more often than not these are the people in the cafeteria who start and spread dirty rumors and vicious lies. These kids seek attention and they really don’t care whether its negative or positive – attention is attention.

But now, with this deal, The New York Times has seemingly ditched us for the newer, cooler kid.

We tell ourselves that digital media allows journalists to tell stories holistically with even more intelligence and integrity, which is a great thing. And we know that, at least for now, the popular powerhouse couple – Facebook and The New York Times – could help restructure the social structure and restore journalism’s place a a cool kid.

But for now, journalist are moping around with hurt feelings, wondering how many of journalism’s core-values will be compromised in order to finally find its place in the digital media cafeteria.

Warren’s article offers excellent insight into this new deal. Click here to read it in its entirety.