In fact, the list (which Glenn linked earlier) is so inspiring that I figured maybe I could use it to help augment the Atkins editorial itself, in the hope of annotating the points he raises:
Benefits from citizen journalism include dramatic photos and videos that add insight to news events. After all, media outlets and their reporters can't be everywhere.
However, there are drawbacks and dangers that shouldn't be ignored.
For one thing, encouraging I-reports from disaster scenes, crime scenes, or natural-disaster areas could lead people seeking their 15 minutes of fame into dangerous situations. It is inevitable that future I-reporters will chase tornadoes or run toward police shootouts to get a better angle.
Other concerns are bias, conflicts of interest, and credibility. Some citizen journalists might submit reports to promote certain agendas.
Of course, there is the potential for scams, fraud, and doctored photos and video. People might stage phony incidents. The fact-checking and source corroboration involved in mainstream media are usually absent from citizen journalism.
Remember, the links are not his. It's just my amateur way of trying to provide a little "professional satire."
Atkins point is that citizen journalists (as opposed to "the pros") might do the sort of things listed above -- "in order to promote certain agendas."
To avoid these pitfalls, news outlets that solicit citizen journalists should set standards and issue warnings to safeguard amateurs.
Um, considering the links I just added, can I offer a change in the wording? How about.....
To avoid these pitfalls, bloggers and citizen journalists should set standards and issue warnings to safeguard news outlets.
Nah. That's carrying satire too far.
But let's continue:
The Citizen Media Law Project, jointly affiliated with Harvard Law School's Berkman Center for Internet & Society and the Center for Citizen Media, has been established to provide tools for citizen journalists. It plans to develop a legal guide that will cover insurance; privacy; access to meetings, records and property; and how to use freedom-of-information laws. ChiTownDailyNews.org plans to recruit and train 75 citizen journalists, one for each Chicago neighborhood, to work with editors to produce a daily news report.
I have no problem with such outreach, and I think it's commendable that Atkins recognizes the potential value of those he calls "citizen journalists," and wants to help them with safety, ethics and accuracy. No one wants to see bloggers get killed doing things like chasing tornadoes or running into police shootouts to get a better angle.
But right there I used that awful "B" word without thinking. I'm not sure that Atkins considers citizen journalists and bloggers synonymous, because when he finally gets around to using the "B" word, he describes them with uncomplimentary (if vintage) phraseology:
Mainstream media have their flaws, including incidents of plagiarism and ethical breaches. However, unlike the army ofpajamarati bloggers sitting in their bedrooms, reporters are in the field cultivating sources, interviewing policymakers, investigating and fact-checking. For every insightful I-report, there are thousands of valuable articles, videos and photos produced by veteran reporters.
Citizen journalism is a good thing, but it shouldn't be viewed as the future of journalism, a substitute for professional reporting by established media. Citizen journalism should augment media coverage, not replace it.
Sorry to resort to "link satire" again, but why the about-face? How did these dangerous risk takers he wants trained and insured suddenly become an "army of pajamarati bloggers sitting in their bedrooms" in contrast to "reporters [] in the field cultivating sources, interviewing policymakers, investigating and fact-checking?"
Is he suggesting that Michael Yon, Bill Ardolino, Bill Roggio, Michael Totten are groveling in their bedrooms, while "real" reporters are risking their lives in Iraq? As to the interviewing of policy makers, countless bloggers conduct such interviews, podcasts (the Glenn and Helen Show being one) and some even have daily talk radio shows.
Fact checking?
Bloggers don't do that? (Sorry, but there's that list again! It's just too long....)
Hey, I'm all for augmenting media coverage and not replacing it. That's why I wrote this post!
I wish someone would tell me whether pajamas are apropriate attire for jumping into tornadoes and dodging police bullets, though. I have this weird thing about maintaining professional amateur standards.
UPDATE (08/17/07): My sincere apologies for misspelling Bill Ardolino's name. I was in a hurry as I often am. Fortunately, Bill emailed me to set me straight.
Yes, the lack of accountability and fact-checking in the blogsophere is scandalous!
UPDATE: Larry Atkins does not seem to count Fox News as among the pros:
Fox News is a biased propaganda wing of the Bush administration and the Republican Party, yet they consider themselves journalists.
I guess that means CNN and CBS must be the unbiased pros.
UPDATE: Thank you Glenn Reynolds for the link, and welcome all!
Don't miss Glenn's link to Michael Silence, where I found this gem from Seattle Times Editor David Boardman:
...if we allowed our news meetings to evolve into a liberal latte klatch, I have no doubt that a pathological case of group-think would soon set in.
Hmmmm.... Isn't that what they call closing the barn door after the horses have escaped?
posted by Eric on 08.16.07 at 07:29 PM
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/5405
[from the editorial]:
"The fact-checking and source corroboration involved in mainstream media are usually absent from citizen journalism."
Maybe, but reporters and their editors frequently seem to lack specialized knowledge of the things they're supposed to be informing us about. Being a skeptical interviewer, a quick study, and a clear writer is not always a good substitute for actually knowing what the hell you're talking about. Even the most scrupulous fact-checking cannot indicate which facts are telling or significant. I've met--socially, not professionally--several of the Tokyo bureau chiefs and other higher-ups for big-guns Western news organizations. Some are clearly well-versed and experienced in things Japanese; others are equally obviously at the mercy of their local staff, which is why they end up peddling the same tired, bland stories about Japanese social and political life again and again.
The thinker included Diana Griego Erwin, which I knew about, and Bob Wisehart.
I always wondered what happened to Bob.
Jim Van Vliet I never missed.
Next on the chopping block at the Bee is Ailene Voisin.
Ailene broke the cardinal rule when she spoke her mind about crooked NBA refs (the only time she printed something I agreed with by the way). Here's a taste -
It was the game everyone remembers -- Game 6 of the 2002 Western Conference finals between the Kings and Lakers at Staples Center -- the one that infuriated many and mystified others, the officiating so one-sided that consumer advocate Ralph Nader demanded an investigation.
At the time, I merely considered it a travesty, and the worst-officiated NBA playoff game ever. My column that night was a rip job on the refs -- a first in my 21 years of covering the NBA. I thought Kings coach Rick Adelman was remarkably composed while providing a biting postgame critique. I recorded Lakers coach Phil Jackson's too-coy comments and watched him struggle to keep a straight face. I rolled my eyes at Kobe Bryant and was greeted with knowing laughter.
...snip...
The refs stunk. The officiating was a travesty. The Kings wuz robbed. Until further notice, that's what I believe.
But this Donaghy character makes you wonder. He makes us all wonder.
The Kings are owned by a couple of casino tycoons (read gangsters) from Las Vegas who really enjoy using the possiblity of a sudden move as incentive to get the city to build them a new stadium. A stadium the Bee is inexplicably in favor of.
You can't suggest that the crooks fixed the game of the century for the Kings. Not in this climate.
Last column by Ailene I think. Pity, I was just starting to like her.
Papertiger · August 17, 2007 02:16 AM
That should read, "You can't suggest that the crooks fixed the game of the century against the Kings."
Papertiger · August 17, 2007 02:21 AM
Personally I don't want "insightful" reporting any more than "insightful" testimony. Call me Joe Friday, but I just want factual reporting. Save the "insightful" for the Op-Ed pages that are labeled as such.
However, unlike the army of pajamarati bloggers sitting in their bedrooms, reporters are in the field cultivating sources, interviewing policymakers, investigating and fact-checking.
Talk about missing the point. One of the great advantages of citizen media is that it's written by actual experts in the field -- people who really understand what they're talking about.
We've already seen how completely hopeless our J-school grads are at writing about any field outside of their liberal arts education. Military, scientific, civil engineering...hell, the business writers can barely comprehend the financial stories they write about every day. The point isn't that these glorified typists have cultivated sources, it's that now we can get the straight story directly from the sources themselves.
I don't need some guy with a rolodex full of experts; I have my own damn rolodex now. You're being disintermediated, Atkins. You'd do well to concentrate on the added value you bring to the business, before people realize how unnecessary you're becoming.
The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
Don?t bang your head!
Well done, Eric.