Ready, get Net, go

That the Net is a formidable source of news dispersal has been known for some time. In fact, the power of the new medium was evident when the judge in the au pair murder trial late last year in which an Indian child was killed said he would announce the verdict on the Internet to prevent a media stampede. Other big stories have also been broken on the Net, during the Oklahoma bombing trial. But during the Lewinsky scandal, the Net was a constant source of not just news distribution, but even news break.

The Lewsinsky story was first splashed on the Net by Matt Drudge, a maverick, one-man operation who runs a gossip website called Drudge Report drudgereport.com. A self-styled poohbah and rumour monger, Drudge got wind of the fact that Newsweek, which was working on the story, was holding it back for further confirmation. Drudge blew the whistle on the Net, setting of a media chase and forcing Newsweek to put their story on the Nettoo instead of waiting for their next issue.

Over the next fortnight, newspapers and magazine scored several firsts on the Net, including some not so credible ones. The Dallas Morning News, for instance, rushed to the Net with a story about a Secret Service agent who had seen President Clinton and Monica Lewinsky in a compromising position in the White House and who had been subpoenaed by Kenneth Starr. Early this week, the Wall Street Journal ran a similar story on its website saying White House steward Bayani Nelvis had told a federal grand jury he saw the President and Monica Lewinsky alone in a study next to the Oval Office.

As it turned out, both stories were premature and the papers were forced to back down on the original stories they subsequently posted diluted stories saying White House personnel told other White House staff about seeing the two together, but the trend was already established: Ready, Get Net, Go8230;.! In the case of the Wall Street story, White Houseofficials say they were given 30 minutes by the paper8217;s reporter to respond to a query, and even that deadline was not honoured. Said one senior administration official: quot;The normal rules of checking or getting a response to a story seem to have given way to the technology of the Internet and the competitive pressure of getting it first.quot;

But why the First on the Net mania when newspapers can score on the morrow? Well for one, newspapers are increasingly getting beaten to the news by the 24-hour television news channels. Even so, in cases like the Lewinsky event, the big news breaks are parceled out or leaked to many papers and they are forced to share the glory the next morning. Brian Duffy, the Wall Street reporter who went to the Net with the Nelvis story said they did so because they heard the footsteps from at least one other news organisation and just didn8217;t think it was going to hold in this crazy cycle we8217;re in.

Increasingly, the Net is providing newspapers immediacy and a platform to evenbeat television. And thus far at least, other news outlets have been generous in crediting the original news source, even if it is on the Net.

Naturally, the news rush is not without hazards. Not only are stories bombing like the Dallas Morning News scoop, but the Internet is changing the very perception of news. Now, literally anyone can be a publisher, editor or reporter. Like Matt Drudge. A one-man operation based in Los Angeles, Drudge has built up quite a dedicated following by breaking some news stories based mainly on leaks; he invites people to send him gossipy tid-bits by e-mail. But many of his stories are also sheer baloney.

The Netly news concept is already finding defenders though. If journalists can share quot;furtive rumors of dalliancesquot; with their friends and colleagues, why not with readers and viewers? goes the argument. Particularly when mongers of Net news, like Matt Drudge, clearly state that what they are dispensing is unsubstantiated news which may or may not be true.quot;People should understand that the information they get is middling quality 8212; better than what their neighbour heard at the dry cleaner8217;s but not as good as the New York Times,quot; says Michael Kinsley, editor of the online magazine Slate, writing in the latest issue of Time.

For many, the acceleration of the news cycle because of 24-hour cable television and the Internet heralds an erosion in the standards of journalism. In the old days, a reporter got anywhere from six to 24 hours, if not more, to work on a story and to confirm and cross check facts. But with proliferating cable channels and net rivals, even venerable news organisations are lowering the barriers to stay in business. Veteran journalists in Washington recall how the Watergate story broke over a period of nearly two years. Now, it might have taken all of one week. And Deep Throat would have been called Sore Throat.