I don't know how I feel about "citizen journalism" (or the term, for that matter: Aren't we all citizens?), blogging, wikis and all that, but I'm becoming suspect of it as a phenomenon. First and most obviously, grow this trend big enough and trained journalists start losing jobs. And - it may sound elitist, I don't know - but just because anyone theoretically could do this doesn't mean anyone should. This is a perfect example.
It's not "citizen journalism" per se, but it speaks perfectly to Christie's point in class today: editorial oversight, fact confirmation - things that journalists know to rely on - don't have the same role here. If a newspaper had done this, there'd be a libel suit. Seigenthaler couldn't sue if he tried - it's as if this "biographer" doesn't even exist.
In response to his ordeal, Seigenthaler wrote this op-ed piece in USA Today. When he says "poisen-pen intellects," he's right. Professional journalists aren't perfect, as the state of journalism today reflects.
But at least when they mess up, we know where to find them.
Josh (not verified) @ December 3, 2005 - 1:32pm
Courtney:
As someone who has been a newspaper journalist, an independent blogger, and someone who writes a blog for a news organization, I'll disagree with you here.
What citizen journalism has done is open up the possibility of reporting stories mainstream media (MSM) won't touch -- and that MSM wouldn't find out about. Indymedia has done some fantastic work (and some crappy work as well) in this vein, and sometimes it takes a citizen journalist (or 12) to generate MSM interest in a story.
What it does require, and I fully support the need for this, is that news consumers learn to consider what they're reading who the source is, who the writer is, and what the individual's motives for writing might be. We should be teaching students how to discriminate in their research, whether it be on some serious academic topic in college or whether it be some sixth grader reading about Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes.
It also requires people to maintain ownership of their identities online. John Siegenthaler was an outstanding journalist for decades at I believe the Tennessean, and if some little 1,200 circulation paper in rural Iowa had printed a rumor about his participation in the murder of the Kennedys, I'm sure he would have found out very quickly and put a stop to it. In the same way he'd protect himself offline, he needs to protect himself online. It sucks that it has to happen, but it does.
The glory of Wikipedia and Wikinews is that if Siegenthaler had googled himself once a month, he would have known to go in there and fix the item himself. The downside is that you never know if the information is accurate, especially if you're reading up on some really obscure subject.
I'll stop rambling now.
»