To celebrate the fifth anniversary of its operations in Spain, PR agency AxiCom has partnered with ANEI, the National Association of Internet Companies, to commission the "The Information Professional in the Web 2.0 Era" study. The new research looks at how social media channels and tools are shaping the daily routines of journalists and other media influencers. The study canvassed and compared views from two distinct groups;

1)    Journalists who do not write a blog.
2)    Bloggers who only write for blogs.

Both groups agreed that it is no longer possible to produce rounded content without using social media channels for research, this assertion was supported by more than half of journalists and nearly 70% of bloggers. Additionally, 68% of bloggers agreed that social networks offer greater freedom of the press.

Both groups cited journalists who also write a blog as being the most influential thought leaders in the contemporary media landscape.However, the groups differed on what profession is the most important information source - only 9% of bloggers (as compared to 44% of traditional journalists), considered journalists as the most influential.

Journalists and bloggers both use social media to connect with readers; the majority of bloggers regard Twitter as being the most significant social media channel, whereas journalists consider Facebook and Twitter to be of roughly equal importance. The full sentiment break down is below:

•    Bloggers - Twitter (58%), Facebook (21%) and forums (21%)
•    Journalists - Facebook (39%), Twitter (35%) and LinkedIn (18%)

Journalists perceive a greater negative impact of blogs and social networks upon the media landscape Almost all journalists surveyed (91%) say that these new channels do not maintain the same quality standards as traditional media, 71% of the bloggers agreed with the statement.90% of journalists also consider that "anything goes" on these channels, but only 56% of bloggers agree with this observation.

When presented with a number of statements looking at the social media, journalists registered the most critical feedback, some interesting results included:

•    75% believe that hearsay and false reporting are widespread on social networks;
•    65% believe that news is pushed through too quickly by social channels;
•    78% believe that not enough time is expended verifying news;
•    73% believe that social channels necessitate a loss of journalistic rigour;
•    62% believe social channels are unreliable;
•    70% believe that the information presented by social channels is biased;
•    72% believe social channels have given them a heavier workload.

Bloggers are less judgmental of social media channels and typically their responses to the same statements averaged 20 percent lower than those of the journalists. As traditional publishers and new media vie for dominance in a rapidly changing market, it's not surprising that there is a clear difference in opinion between these competitors.

Given this rivalry, perhaps the most surprising of the results was in answer to the question "what medium generates the greatest social impact?" 41% of bloggers stated the greatest impact came from digital editions of traditional media publications, whereas 46% of journalists felt it was generated by social networks.

Even though we have seen these rival camps develop, it is clear that both recognise the benefits in both new and old media and this suggests that both can coexist in the longer term.

Headline findings: 
• Journalists and bloggers agree it is no longer possible to develop successful editorial content without sourcing information from social media channels.
• Journalists are more likely to cite negative aspects social media brings to their jobs. 
• Both journalists and bloggers use social media to connect with their readers.

Monica