 |
| Image: The Vinceton Post |
With the advent of the internet and new media technologies, the definition of journalism is being blurred and the profession stretched to include the general public, as the audience continues to gain a greater capacity to participate in news gathering and news dissemination.
In today’s times where new media such as blogs, Twitter and Facebook, as well as technologies such as camera phones and iPhones are a part of everyday life, citizens are receiving more power in broadcasting their opinions, stories and news to the world.
As Stephen Quinn and Stephen Lamble state in their book Online Newsgathering: Research and Reporting for Journalism, citizen journalism is where “members of the public, who are not professional journalists, contribute content that is published on traditional media,” (2007, p.43).
There are increasing amounts of citizen journalists who contribute their first-hand accounts, photos and videos of events, as seen during news coverage of natural disasters and terrorists attacks. While these citizen journalists, as they are called, provide on-the-scene action and accounts, (remember the shocking images we saw on replay of the 2001 September 11 terrorist attacks, 2004 Thailand Tsunami and 2005 London bombings – see YouTube clips below), should they be called journalists?
While these clips demonstrate citizen journalist footage being broadcast, it is evident that the citizen journalists’ footage is used as part of a news stories. As Roger Fidler states in his book Mediamorphosis: Understanding New Media, “New media do not replace old media. Traditional media change to absorb the best of new media,” (1997 p.23).
Although these citizens are contributing to media stories and broadcasts, it is professional journalists who have been trained with the skills to gather various sources, check facts, and hopefully have gained the credibility to write newsworthy and accurate stories. While I highly value the contributions made by citizens, who improve and enhance the news, I do not believe that they should be given the title of a 'journalist' when their professional counterparts have undergone the education and training to be given such a title.
However, there are always two sides to every argument. Some say the rise of citizen journalists is due to the public’s dissatisfaction with the media and criticism of journalists who continue to write frivolous stories in the aim of selling papers and making profits. Suellen Tapsall and Carolyn Varley conclude in their book, Journalism Theory in Practise that the progression of journalism has seen the journalist as no longer a reporter of quality news but an independent businessperson who needs to sell goods to make a profit.
This viewpoint has contributed to the significant increase in online blogs, personal websites and now newspaper websites offering public comment, as citizens and audiences reject the framing of the news by media conglomerates and want to be a part of the process to ensure the voices of the public are heard and their true interests and needs met.
A perfect example of this is OhmyNews International (OMNI), a South Korean online news source that was created in 2002 for citizens of the country to become reporters of news that was censored or strictly prohibited by the government. However, professional editors still edit and monitor the news content. The following link provides a view of the OMNI website and an article on the organisation’s plans for the future and the significant value and belief in citizen journalists changing the future of the news.
On OMNI’s new website (see link below), which features a more blog style and format, there is an entry from the 29th of June 2010 that describes Yahoo’s debut style guide for the web, The Yahoo! Style Guide: The Ultimate Sourcebook for Writing, Editing, and Creating Content for the Digital World, which OMNI describes as “an excellent addition to citizen journalists’ toolbox, and a boost to their credibility in the world of professional journalism” (2010, online).
In 2007 OMNI recorded 50,000 citizen journalists (Quinn & Lamble 2007, p 43), and while some good quality blog content appears in mainstream media, professional journalists continue to filter the content that appears in traditional media.
Therefore, I believe that the term 'citizen journalist' is not fitting, as these members of society are rather informants than journalists. They help shape the news by providing eye-witness accounts and real time action, but it is the trained professionals who gather, arrange, write and disseminate the news that are the true journalists, worthy of the title. Perhaps citizen journalists should be called 'citizen informants'?
What are your thoughts?
Bibliography
Darylvdz. (2007). 7/7 London bomb terrorist attack on bus, Youtube, accessed 13 August 2010, <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuhBdHc8Nqs>
Fidler, Roger. (1997). Mediamorphosis: Understanding New Media, Thousand Oaks, California, Pine Forge Press.
JoesZone 2006, Rare Amateur 911 Videos, Youtube, accessed 13 August 2010, <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fH7c8H6SNw>
OhmyNews International. (2010). Citizen Journalism Theory and Practise, OhmyNews, accessed 13 August 2010, <http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?menu=A11100&no=386159&rel_no=1&back_url>
OhmyNews International. (2010). Curating the debate on citizen journalism, WordPress, accessed 13 August 2010, <http://international.ohmynews.com/2010/06/29/ap-stylebook-for-citizen-journalists/>
Quinn, Stephen & Lamble, Stephen. (2007). ‘Citizen Journalism and Audience-Generated Content’, Online Newsgathering: Research and Reporting for Journalism, Focal Press, Burlington, p. 43-57.
Tapsall, Suellen & Varley, Carolyn. (2006). Journalism Theory in Practise, Oxford University Press.
The Vinceton Post [image] (2007). The Rise of Citizen Journalism, WordPress.com, accessed 13 August 2010, <http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2007/07/30/the-rise-of-citizen-journalism/>
Ebony,
ReplyDeleteYour comment on my blog (shameless plug "http://patrickonmedia.blogspot.com/") and your original post have made a significant impact on my understanding of the term, and its various limitiations.
We both ask how a citizen journalist differs from a 'regular journalist. I offer that a citizen journalist exists outside the professional sphere of media. You offer a similar definition that an ordinary citizen acts more as an 'informant' which I totally agree with.
Reading your post a thought struck me, and that is the difference between fact and analysis. Whereas both 'journalist' and 'citizen journalist' provide 'facts (footage, photos, soundbites etc.) only a journalist is in an authoritative position to provide analysis, commentary and history; all of which can be taught through the training most journalists (ourselves included) recieve. I think this shows the limits of citizen journalism.
Perhaps this point is obvious, but it adds distance to the gap between journalist and citizen informant, to borrow your term.
Thank you for the post,
PAtrick