In this essay, contained in the book The World Wide Web and Contemporary Cultural Theory, Steven Jones states that "[t]his chapter will argue that journalism and the Web are linchpins for understand the Internet and out hopes for it as a public forum." (page 172) I immediately "flashed" on the idea that the separation of the World Wide Web from the Internet is a division that we have not yet touched upon in this course, and that it is an important distinction (though it is also a distinction that is becoming more and more blurred as the two terms are used interchangeably. I remember when I first started hearing about the Internet and the World Wide Web (WWW), back in the days of the Mosaic browser and the Prodigy service, that I was not sure if the two (the Internet and the WWW) were one and the same thing or not. I do remember someone explaining the difference to me, at some point, but I was confused and basically dropped the issue. And then, later, I remember reading an explanation about how the Internet was everything that was connected together (email, newsgroups, databases, etc.) and that the World Wide Web was just one aspect of the Internet. But now in my mind the two have blurred into one again, as I am certain is reflected in my writings about the subject. On page 174, Jones writes "[t]he Internet, I believe, begins at the verge between the print and electronic traditions. The Web, particularly, is a technology that represents the development of electronic expression in a medium sufficiently removed from paper to render it apart from print." Jones continues "[i]t is a medium of the screen and the link of text and connection. As a result, I believe that the Internet is the whole of the real understood under the category of the future." And finally, Jones concludes "[t]he Web exists in the present as a technology, but exists in the future as an infinite potentiality of connection, and it must be examined as such." I much agree with Jones’ assessment of the difference between the two items, and appreciate how he has stated that they need to be viewed in the concept of the future, as to how they will evolve.

On page 175, in a discussion about "content", Jones writes of how users turn to the Web (and also to the Internet) for news information. He says that "[y]et we go to the Web less for ‘breaking’ news and more for news of what is to come—the deeper, richer, more analytic news that cannot be readily attained through the use of older media." This makes me think of all of the on-line news sources (and news sources that have on-line components but which also work in other mediums, too) that now allow the user to "sign-up for breaking email alerts!" CNN currently advertises the appeal of their email-based "breaking news" service as "be the first to know". One of the problems with this service, as I am certain has been evidenced with recent events, is that "breaking news" is occurring all of the time. When I am at work, I do not want several emails an hour, each one designed to throw me into a tizzy, about the latest rumored problem. There are plenty of real problems that I am having enough trouble dealing with, thank you very much. Instead, I choose to listen to NPR, knowing that the programming will be broken into if something significant occurs, and I turn to the Web, several times a day to read the "headlining" stories at CNN.com and at CBC.ca (I like some balance in my news.) The Web does offer its readers access to news in an immediate manner. Jones sites the fact that "[c]onverting President Clinton’s videotaped testimony in the Starr report to streaming video occurred … quickly" and continues "… it was delivered indexed: the Web has turned the connection between headline and lead and ‘the rest of the story’ into a quite literal connection, one of the hyperlink." (page 176) I have a problem with the immediacy of news coverage from the Web, especially that of breaking news – I much prefer to receive my news after it has been analyzed and has had some time to be "accepted." I do not want my news to keep me on the edge of my seat, waiting each minute to see what will next occur. Instead, I do want some delay – I do not want panic.

Jones also writes about how "[o]n the Web, referral is built-in via the hyperlink." He then continues "[a]s a result, news on the Web has less to do with creating a record of life … and more to do with anticipating what’s next by accumulating information and making connections among stories, hearsay, gossip, disparate pieces of information that are sometimes coupled in the reader’s imagination, and other times linked via hypertext markup language." (page 178) I do admit to liking the linkings of information, via hyperlinks. However, I tend to view most Web news with a cynical and questioning mind – unless the information is coming from what I consider to be a reputable source, then I will, at some level, doubt its veracity. I do agree with Jones that Web-based news does have more to do with "… anticipating what’s next by accumulating information and making connections" then it does with "… creating a record of life." This is an important distinction.

Jones concludes his essay with the words "[a] journal is not merely an exercise in recordkeeping, but also an exercise in slowing time and capturing space." He then continues, saying "[t]he Web is unlike any journal heretofore in existence. The history it shall reveal will not be read in the linear, sequentially unfolding of events over time, nor in the structures of space it may develop, but in the relational movements of our interest and attention as we pay it heed." (page 182) I keep thinking of Yahoo and other search-engine sites that advertise "the Day’s most frequent searches". This seems to encourage a person to follow the pack and perform the same search, rather than looking for whatever information it was that originally made you go to the site.