Can a citizen journalist research and break the same type of investigative story a New York Times team can? Depends. If the blogger has the tenacity, means and resources to do so, then why not? Why can't we call that finished product a piece of journalism? Simply because the citizen journalist doesn't have the title?
Perhaps documentarian is a better title here. I do not consider myself a journalist just because I am writing this blog. Put another way, the act of writing this blog doesn't make me journalist. I am, however, documenting my perceptions of the world around me.
A journalistic institution has to approach a story, in this case Barack Obama's acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention, from an angle while still maintaining objectivity. But for a lot of media outlets, objectivity is the polar opposite of what they are trying to achieve. Nothing obligates a blogger or citizen journalist to be objective, accordingly, no one can stop a citizen journalist from hammering out their reactions, thoughts and feelings on a keyboard. Citizen journalists could sound off on Obama's "thank yous" at the beginning of the speech, or on the type of people the cameras on each channel cut to. They could criticize Obama's mannerisms or his wife's expressions, Biden's enthusiasm or any other miniscule detail and probably get away with it. Their only real obligation is to themselves and occasionally, depending on the blog, their readers. But the former usually trumps the latter. It is important to keep in mind one of Clay Shirky's points: people who create or share user-generated content don't necessarily intend it to be for general or even mass consumption.
A journalist knowingly adheres to an established code of ethics. Documenting something by being in the right place at the right time with the right gadgets is not enough criteria to be called a journalist. Just because someone attended the Democratic National Convention and took a picture (you know you saw the incessant flashes during the speeches) doesn't necessarily mean that person is now a professional photographer. Likewise, just because I'm writing my thoughts and ideas about the convention doesn't make me a journalist either. However, I am undoubtedly committing an act of journalism. Just as Shirky describes the scribes' battle when moveable type was invented, journalists are attempting to redefine their craft in a world where mass publishing is only a click away.
Maybe the obligation doesn't even belong to bloggers or citizen journalists at all. Maybe it belongs to us as readers to distinguish when information is coming from a reliable media source and acknowledge when it is not. In either case, whatever it is we are reading shouldn't dictate what we think, what is important is that we are aware what is being said, who it is being said by and what the agenda is. The reader/viewer/media consumer should know more about a media outlet than its channel or website. They need to be aware of the source of their information and how it may or may not influence them consciously and unconsciously. That way if someone reads about Obama's speech in the New York Times or on washingtonpost.com, they know they're probably getting a more objective version of the story focusing on Obama's key points and the overall impression he was trying to make. Each publication adds its own analysis as well. Whereas, if they read a blog on huffingtonpost.com, they know they're probably getting a more liberal view of the story. Likewise, if they were watching coverage on Fox News, a more conservative outlet, a few things (like Al Gore's speech and preceding fare) were left out.
A simple Google search on blogs hours after the speech came up with full text transcriptions of Obama's words. Some with comments, some without. While that may not be an act of journalism per se, it could definitely be considered a public service. Who knew bloggers could be so nice?
Shirky argues that, "The entire basis on which the scribes earned their keep vanished not when reading and writing vanished but when reading and writing became ubiquitous." And so it seems to be with the value of the journalist's craft. Now that publishing has become so simple, its value has decreased and the value of being a journalist has nearly disappeared. Now, more than ever, we have to place "professional" before journalist to designate our worth lest we be confused with the "citizens." Perhaps writing a blog with the resolve to achieve the same goals as an established media institution counts as an as an act of journalism. However, unless the entry goes through a process of editorial judgment like Shirky says, simply pressing the "submit" button on a weblog doesn't count as an act of journalism.
Photos: Keyboard vs. Pen; Obama acceptance speech video; US cover "Here Comes Everybody" www.shirky.com
By Jenn Harris
August 29, 2008 11:51 PM
I pretty much agreed with your entire blog. Actually I agreed with you, I just don’t entirely agree with Shirky : ) I do think that readers have to be responsible and aware when picking what type of information they want to find online, and where to get that content from. I don't think that because it is so easy to publish, the work of a professional journalist will necessarily become less valuable. A reader will give value to a piece of journalism based on to what extent it meets their needs. Since every person’s content needs are different, there is no way to tell if everyone will decide to ignore professional journalism just because there is so much other content on the web. In taking into account the sheer amount of people there are online and the insurmountable amount of content being searched for, in my opinion, there will always be a need for straight, objective content. As a side note, the blog looks great too : )
By Kathryn Evarts
August 31, 2008 5:38 PM
I think you are totally correct in saying that the obligation now lies with the reader to sift through the Net and find out if what they are reading is accurate and worth their time. This is taking their role as concerned citizen to and extreme and I hope that this will not always be the case, because I do not think readers will necessarily take the time to really find the best sources of information. Maybe this will be part of the media's job in the future. I think overall you did a very good job with this.