Citizen Journalism (Part 2)

Now that I have covered the basics of the issues surrounding citizen journalism, I think that it is important to look into the major ethical issues of citizen journalism and whether or not this relatively new concept will be beneficial or detrimental to our consumption of the news. 

To start with I would like to point out the views of Bruns. He states: 

“it is no longer appropriate to uphold the mirage of news as product; instead, news is a process, never finished, always continuing, and (given favorable conditions of participation in which constructive contributions outweigh disruption) gradually evolving towards a better understanding of ‘the truth,’ or at least towards the development of a widely shared consensus on what the facts of the matter at hand may be.”

This statement makes me wonder about the ‘truth’ and whether increased collaboration does indeed make more truthful news. I personally believe that it is at the discretion of the reader of traditional news to decide whether or not the information is factual or bias or shows inconsistency. I have these questions...

1. Does the introduction of this new medium applaud (or actually disregard) the general publics intelligence by allowing them to contribute the news and judge/ edit other peoples work? OR

2. Does this new medium insult peoples intelligence as traditional news consumers by suggesting that news must be 100% truthful and produced to establish a consensus? 

I am swaying towards the notion that whilst the news should be widely shared and people should have the right to express their opinions on news items without the traditional gatekeeping that occurs in newspaper and magazine production. However, I also believe that those with journalism qualifications and experience should have the right to be the providers of quality news - that is what they are trained for and they bare the responsibility of being answerable to the reading public. 

From the Week 10 reading I found this concept really interesting as well. 

The Four Principles of Produsage: 

1. They must enable open participation in and commu-nal evaluation of content contribution 

2. They must allow for the emergence of fluid heterarchies and an ad hoc meritocratic governance in and by the communities which emerge from this process

3. They must allow for content and process to remain unfinished and continuing

4. And (perhaps most importantly) they must avoid the perception that content created in the process is intended to fall under the ownership of the news organization, providing rewards only for the corporation rather than also for individual participants. 

These all address the strategy and participation involved in citizen journalism. As a media and communications student I acknowledge that online citizen journalism is an alternative outlet for a different type of news and expression of ideas and I believe that Bruns is correct in his directives. 

The fourth point is especially relevant in today’s converging society. When large companies own citizen journalism outlets there can be perceived censorship of the publics work.

It’s tricky to get your head around all of the issues surrounding such a concept as citizen journalism. I think the increase of new technology has complicated the issue of honest journalism and whilst it increases the chance for everyone to have their say published, the idea of a collaborative system is very much confused by issues of ownership, fair critiques and honest/ethical contributions and the issue of sustainability. 

My final point is the issue of which articles, contributions and internet postings to call citizen journalism. In recent times, the publication of videos and articles have allegedly increased cyber-bullying and defamation. The online (often worldwide) spread of content such as this, happens long before anyone has a chance to edit, alter or evaluate it. Does this count as citizen journalism - it comments on current happenings, and is published online by an everyday person. 

Where does one draw the line??