Barkāns: Sociālie mediji ir pilnībā mainījuši informācijas vidi (3)

фото

Ekskluzīvi | 2013. gada 19. februārī plkst. 15:00

Sociālie mediji ir būtiski mainījuši ikdienā patērējamās informācijas vidi un apjomu, un ir pieaugusi pārbaudītas informācijas vērtība. Tā intervijā MixNews.lv teica A/S "Aģentūra LETA" valdes priekšsēdētājs Mārtiņš Barkāns.

Ir kļuvis daudz grūtāk atšķirt nesvarīgu informāciju no svarīgas, novērojis LETA vadītājs: "Piemēram, "Twitter" pēdējo gadu laikā ir parādījis, ka var uzbūvēt sev nosacītu ziņu lentu, vienkārši sekojot noteiktiem cilvēkiem, uzņēmumiem, firmām, un būt detaļās lietas kursā par par viņu viedokļiem un gaitām, nemaz neesot lietas kursā, kas notiek valstī, kurā tu dzīvo."

Profesionālajā ziņu žurnālistikā šāds fenomens pirms desmit piecpadsmit gadiem likās pilnīgi neiespējams. "Kādreiz mēs diskutējām, vai aģentūrai varētu būt tāds pakalpojums kā "baumas", tad nu šobrīd "Twitter" šo jautājumu ir atrisinājis - baumas ir pieejamas ikdienā un plašos apjomos," atzina Barkāns.

Vienlaikus ar pieaugošo jauno mediju un interneta saziņas nozīmi ir palielinājusies pārbaudītas informācijas vērtība.

Barkāns atzina, ka baumas, interpretācijas un pseidoziņas šobrīd ir ļoti viegli izplatīt, tādēļ ir svarīgi, lai būtu kāds apliecinājums, ka informācija ir ticama. Un šeit kļūst aktuāla aģetūras kompetence, pieredze un profesionāla pieeja.

"Mūsu bizness ir informācijas bizness, un jau daudzus gadus mēs esam ne tikai vadošā ziņu aģentūra, bet arī vadošā informācijas monitoringa aģentūra," sava uzņēmuma prestižu uzsvēra LETA vadītājs, piebilstot, ka aģentūras LETA misija jau sen ir definēta - "būt vadošajam informācijas pakalpojumu sniedzējam, un pašreizējos apstākļos šādu misiju aģentūra arī pilda."

Komentāri 3
SpSRRiKSkpAFbHLlcDpirms 5 gadiem
Barry Here is one way of looking at how the Fed has crateed/exacerbated the housing bubble. As you have pointed out, real estate is an Asset Class: the real bubble has been in the increased liquidity that has fueled home price appreciation. This increase in liquidity began in 1997, as the Fed responded to a series of crises that threatened financial markets.>> The Asian Crisis, LTCM, Y2K, the Nasdaq Burst: each time the Fed> generated more and more liquidity. Taken individually, they might> have been correct responses, but the Fed's repeated willingness to> flood the markets with money has arguably crateed a moral hazard > environment in which market participants have been willing to take on> more and more risk (and more leverage) in the belief that Uncle Al> will bail them out.>> One of the most lucid arguments for this comes from John Makin, an> economist with AEI and a principle with Caxton. This article is one> of the best I've read on the Fed's role in creating/exacerbating the> current imbalances in the economy.>> Enjoy!>> AlexGreenspan's Second BubbleBy John MakinI knew Alan Greenspan had his first bubble in late 1999 when cab drivers were too busy talking to their brokers on cell phones to talk with customers. The “cab driver test” flashed its second bubble warning light to me just recently when I arrived in Key West for the annual winter vacation with my family. Without any prompting, our cab driver told us of a Key West real estate market on fire. Condos that were selling a year ago for $600,000 could not be touched for $1 million today, while the units under construction were sold four times over before anyone even thought of occupying them. The old hotels were being torn down to be replaced by condos that were selling like hotcakes before construction had begun. Meanwhile, room rates and rental rates in Key West have hardly budged. The implied return on investment in real estate is tied to an expectation of ever-rising prices, not to income from property.Although Greenspan and his Federal Open Market Committee colleagues may not have the opportunity to come to Key West and talk to the cab drivers about real estate, they could have heard similar stories over the past several years in the red-hot real estate market around Jackson Hole, Wyoming, where they gather annually for central bankers’ summer camp.Lest I be accused of being unscientific, there is more objective evidence of a housing bubble in the United States than that linked to the opinions of cab drivers. Between 2000 and 2004, house prices, nationwide, rose by more than 40 percent—the fastest rate of increase on record since World War II. Moreover, the pace is accelerating. During 2004, the value of real estate on household balance sheets rose by 12.5 percent. That is far short of the 30 to 40 percent increase in prices evident in some markets over the past twelve to eighteen months, but it denotes a substantial and widespread acceleration in the price of owner-occupied real estate. Meanwhile, the ratio of average yearly rents to house prices has been dropping steadily, from about 5 percent nationwide in the 1990s, to 3.5 percent in 2004, reminiscent of the way earnings plunged relative to soaring equity prices before the tech bubble burst in March 2000. Rental yields in the hotter markets are even lower.What Caused the Housing Bubble?Bubbles in any market feature expectations for price increases that catch fire, so that more and more people begin to chase the market based only on the expectation of ever-rising prices. This bubble has some clear and proximate causes, none of which by itself would have been sufficient to cause a bubble, but which together create a compelling set of preconditions for a housing bubble.The key underlying elements contributing to the new-millennium housing bubble are the Fed’s responses to a series of unique events over the past seven years: the Long-Term Capital Management crisis in the fall of 1998, the collapse
YaRicQdQLZWfpirms 5 gadiem
I totally love this post. Her sense of style is azmniag. Oh and I love the interview questions, they are different, very beautiful post I say. Keep em coming sir.
eOaVtNIfCPWIChspirms 5 gadiem
Pq Sony ericsson e9 uma mer.da ! eu tenho um w205, a irenntet demora mto pra carregar (qdo carrega), compra um Smarphone da Samsung,Lg ou da Nokia!Sony Ericsson nunca mais !