Can the Internet handle big breaking news? [CNET News]
Last Thursday afternoon, in the wake of Michael Jackson's death, millions of Americans started up their web browsers to get the latest information about the pop star's untimely death. Based on reports from content server Akamai, Internet traffic between 6pm and 7pm Eastern time on Thursday increased by 11 percent. Many people were able to get more current information about Jackson via Twitter, Facebook friends and online news sites than they were able to find -- even with non-stop coverage -- on cable news channels. But with so many logging on for their information, many sites slowed to a crawl.
And Google started treating searches about Jackson as a bot attack, due to their large number in so short a period of time.
CNET has a good article featuring a debate between two of their top reporters about the Internet's reliability when it comes to serving up a significant breaking news event to everyone that's looking for information online. Was the slowdown of news sites a significant impediment to finding news about Jackson for you? Or was the more current, more detailed information worth the wait? And what might happen if another news event spiked traffic even more than the 11 percent reported by Akamai? Would the Internet's ability to disseminate information simple melt down?
The spike also highlights the public's desire for immediate information, even at the potential expense of accuracy. Conventional news organizations like cable news networks and newspapers hold news, as a matter of policy, until reports can be confirmed. No such safety levers are present on alternative information sources like Twitter and Facebook.
These are great questions to ponder as we head toward a day when a majority of Americans get their news from online sources, rather than a daily newspaper.
Comments