Citizen Journalism Continues Journey into Unchartered Space
February 10, 2011 6 Comments
Nobody can foresee events such as natural disasters. They happen, are often tragic, and history records the event as a snapshot in time. Sometimes that history is based on well-documented photos, videos, and personal 
observations, and sometimes it is recorded as reality determined by persons or governments with an agenda different than presenting empirical truth.
The government in Egypt recently tried disrupting communications by temporarily stopping Internet and phone access, as well as attempting (in some cases violently) to restrict or limit access to demonstrations by journalists and the international media.
The blockage was done to thwart seditionaries and protestors who had been using social media outlets to organize activities and share information about the uprising with the outside world. (BetaNews)
But the images still found their way out of Cairo to the international community.
Regular citizens taking photos and video with cameras and mobile phones, finding creative ways to transmit the images outside of their country. Images without comment, sometimes awaiting others to add context to the story. We have entered a world of instant communications, a world where we no longer rely on traditional news media, journalists, or government propaganda machines to keep us informed.
The Skeptics Voice an Opinion
There are still those who believe journalism must remain the sole realm of “professionals.” Without professional analysis, news cannot be trusted or fully understood, and amateurs cannot possibly provide required credibility to stories, or explanation to raw media.
David Simon, a former reporter for the Baltimore Sun, now television producer and evangelist for dismantling citizen journalists and bringing back newspapers, testified in front of the US Congress on 6 May 2009, stating:
“…The internet is a marvelous tool and clearly it is the informational delivery system of our future, but thus far it does not deliver much first-generation reporting. Instead, it leeches that reporting from mainstream news publications, whereupon aggregating websites and bloggers contribute little more than repetition, commentary and froth…
…Understand here that I am not making a Luddite argument against the internet and all that it offers. But democratized and independent though they may be, you do not – in my city — run into bloggers or so-called citizen journalists at City Hall, or in the courthouse hallways or at the bars and union halls where police officers gather. You do not see them consistently nurturing and then pressing sources. You do not see them holding institutions accountable on a daily basis.” (RTM)
Of course there is a place for commentators and professionals drilling into a story, however the idea news must be validated through the fog of alcohol in a bar is very 1900s, not valid in the Internet age. We are quickly entering a world where guilt and innocence is better determined through DNA testing and video, rather than an alcoholic detective making a deal with a prosecutor or lawyer
But we all know that is bound to change. There are few places in a city that are not covered by cameras, either fixed or on phones. Very few events will occur that are not recorded at some level, and with social media sites, YouTube, Flickr, and other “iReport” sites, that media can find its way to the Internet at almost real-time speed.
It is Getting Difficult to Hide
We are concerned with privacy – for good reason. With GPS locators in phones, cameras everywhere, license plate recognition software, facial recognition software, finger prints and DNA scans – it is getting really difficult to remain anonymous.
But those who control us (police, governments) want to ensure their secrets are kept secure. And this is not limited to Egypt or Iran, it is also in the US, where journalists were shot (with non-lethal ammunition) trying to record May Day demonstrations in Los Angeles in 2008. In most case where those controlling groups react aggressively to those who wish to record their actions, it is because those actions are breaking some level of code or law, and the controlling group does not want their activities to become part of a formal record.
Examples of this include the Rodney King beatings, LAPD assaulting bicycle riders, Abu Ghraib, and other abundant instances of official misconduct caught on camera. Now we have Wikileaks, love ‘em or hate ‘em, exposing activities by various governments that is opening the eyes of people around the world on what behavior their governments are using when conducting “official” business. And of course this is being aggressively blocked wherever
possible in the name of “national security.”
A Partnership Between Citizen Journalists, Citizens, and the Media
There are sadly, too many examples of violence against traditional journalists, citizen journalists, and normal citizens simply recording the actions of others. Recent attacks on journalists in Egypt, Albania, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Pakistan by government sanctioned forces highlights the desire of those in power to eliminate evidence of their irresponsible, illegal, and immoral activities.
In cases such as these, citizen journalist can work with traditional media to supplement their access to events and incidents that traditional media would be prevented from observing and reporting.
The internet age of social networking, YouTube, photo sharing, twitter, and email might be a dark line drawn in the process of making governments, police, companies, and individuals accountable for their actions. A line that would have never been possible without the Internet, citizen journalists, and an embedded camera in nearly every mobile phone made.
“You Can’t Handle the Truth”
Who can forget that famous line delivered by Jack Nicholson in the movie “A Few Good Men?”
The reality is, we can handle the truth, and must be prepared to handle the truth. We have a basic human right to be informed. We have an obligation to hold our governments and leaders accountable for their actions.
Applaud citizen journalists for their courage and dedication in bringing us images of the truth.
About johnsavageau
Pingback: Citizen Journalism Continues Journey into Unchartered Space « John … | alba news
Pingback: Citizen Journalism Continues Journey into Unchartered Space « John … | World Media Information
Pingback: TravelPod.com Promotes Citizen Journalism and Tsunami Anniversary Blog | Natural Disasters
Citizen journalism has its advantages and disadvantages as you point out rightly.
Tackable is a new iPhone App (in public beta) which wants to serve as a platform for such citizen journalism. We wrote a satirical article about the flaws of such an approach here.
With regard to your insistence that David Simon is “an evangelist for dismantling citizen journalists and bringing back newspapers” he has actually argued for neither. He asks for nothing to be dismantled, and he says specifically that professional journalism must gravitate to the internet as a modern delivery system. His quote is that “cutting down trees and delivering them to doorsteps” is an anachronism.
What he does say is that for high-level comprehensive journalism to exist and to delve intelligently in modern institutions, professional journalists — reporters who cover beats on a daily basis, and do so year to year, and editors who apply intellectual and ethical rigor in presenting that journalism — are required. And that professionalism means exactly that; Journalism is a profession. Only if there is a revenue stream can people devote their lives to the profession and craft of providing comprehensive and systemic reporting. “Citizen journalists” are not journalists, they are citizens, speaking out as they deem appropriate, without the responsibility to present all facts, context or personal transparency. They may alert professionals to a story, and they may be there, on occasion, to witness something noteable. And they may provide excellent commentary. But a comprehensive news report in which the hidden agendas of entrenched institutions are revealed through the harvesting of institutional sources and the recovery of detailed and documented fact? No, sorry. THAT is what Simon is bemoaning the loss of.
Indeed, your half-assed description of his actual argument, mangled as it is into a weak straw-man argument that you can easily mock, is about par for the course for the “citizen” intellect. A trained editor, in a professional news organization, would have looked at your characterization and held you to the actual facts. Instead, you get to pretend that you are presenting Simon’s contentions as they are, and then, with all the ease that comes with intellectual dishonesty, triumph handily.
Journalism is a profession. It can be learned and practiced by many, but if it is to have credibility and if it is to truly hold entrenched institutions to account, it is a career. And for careers, we must pay people a living wage so that they can devote their lives to the daily reporting on everything from municipal institutions to governments. And to pay such wages, there must be a revenue stream — as journalism has always required in the form of subscriptions, until the advent of the internet encouraged newspaper publishers to relinquish their copyright online and destroy the prospects for their industry. That is what Simon is arguing for. And you have done precious little to address that fundamental equation when you falsely claim that Simon is seeking to dismantle anything or bring back newspapers. Simon is arguing that news is a product, that it has value, and that to properly obtain news, professionals will need to be paid. And he argues that the profession must figure out how to do this using the internet. Deal with the real. And stop simplifying the opposing view to the point where you can avoid dealing with it. As, say, a professional might.
Of course I would have to have complete faith and trust the professional journalist is acurately representing the reality – rather than of course simply providing his or her opinion of fact.
Having lived outside of the US for most of my life, and having access to different international news media for most of those years abroad, I can affirm there is a very big difference between interpretation of fact given by Fox News, CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera, or others such as CCTV (and beyond).
So who do we believe? Does raw footage of Rodney King being beaten have less credibility than footage of Rodney King being beaten with commentary by Glen Beck?
Does buying a detective booze in a seedy bar to get the “inside story” give a better context of reality than a cell phone video of an LA cop kicking a cyclist off his bike?
Do you need a seasoned, professional journalist to explain footage of a tornado hammering a town in Arkansas?
I also believe news has value.
I also believe much of the media has been corrupted over the years, becoming a propaganda tool of whatever investor, government, or political motivation is behind the presenting organization.
Having personally been in locations such as Jenin, watching the reality of conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, and the complete misrepresentation and fabrication of a different story by outlets such as Fox News – I am having a lot of personal difficulty believing I should blindly accept the interpretation of news by a “professional” journalist.
For really important issues I’d much prefer to review raw recordings and make my own interpretations.
Given that, you are obviously a very skilled writer, with extremely developed talent expressing your point of view. Better than most, and much better than I could ever hope to express my own ideas.
The continuing danger I see, assuming you are either a “professional” journalist yourself, or represent that industry, is your eloquence of prose is slick enough where those reading it may actually believe that is a definitive point of view, and fact.
The only argument, cutting through the fog of words, is that news does have value – particularly raw news that is made available to all people without a propaganda machine or language specialist inserting context that may not have complete neutrality as a priorty.
Finally – I am not a journalist – I am a blogger. The whole free speech thingy that many of us spent a good part of our life defending. I am fascinated by the concept of citizen journalism, and the impact it has had, and will have on recording news now and in the future.
If, as you correctly point out, I was getting paid for my opinions, and had an editor, then I would not have a blog, I would have a managed column in a newspaper – or I would have a byline on news stories. Maybe even as an embedded reporter in a military unit that would allow me to write stories – as long as the story met the needs of the US military or government.
Give me the raw images any day