Citizen Journalism- Quality Evaluation

How do communities evaluate quality?


It has to be said that this questions can be answered on many different platforms and in a million different ways. For the purpose of this blog, the question will focus on 'citizen journalism' with regards to community quality evaluation. Citizen journalism is an act that has turned into a horse-race between 'little' bloggers and 'big' media.

Citizen Journalism is generally known as 'participatory' journalism', the act of citizens playing an active role in the process of collecting, reporting, analysing and distributing news and information. Best classified as journalism created by non-journalists. The 'act' generally includes DIY media content such as stories, images and video sources, open publishing and public discussions where commenting plays a very strong and important role (Bruns, 2008). As Axel Bruns explains, "citizen journalism and its allied forms of open news coverage (including news-related blogs) have developed a sophisticated array of processes, tools, and technologies for doing so, which are in place in different configurations across the Websites of the movement" (70).

Citizen journalism is an extension of a long-term trend, started from hard-copy/printing media, the activity has increased with the upsurge of Web 2.0. Personally, I celebrate the practice as it challenges mainstream media and brings real issues into light. It also allows 'us' citizens to bypass media governing bodies and red-tape to express ourselves in full form. As Bruns (2007) explains, "this dearth of alternative perspectives in the mainstream media (snidely abbreviated as 'MSM' by many citizen journalists and news bloggers) has become one of the major motivating factors for the establishment of prodused alternatives to industrial modes of news production" (71).

The question of credibility and quality often comes into consideration because of its sources- the 'citizen' journalism. Sourcing and credibility is often the underlying factor for community insecurity and open source unreliability. Katty S sums this up perfectly in some of her findings as she explains that, "The quality of any citizen journalism project reflects the contributions of those who choose to participate, and such projects can be havens for triviality or unreliable content. At the same time, many users are inclined to trust material they find online, particularly if it is called “news”. Look at examples such as Indymedia and Wikipedia, who are often questioned and critised for 'poor quality' content, but are still considered some of the most used, quoted and researched information sources on the Internet. When evaluating 'content quality' it is important not to police the system, otherwise the 'collaborative processes' often become like their controlled mainstream counterparts.

Overall, citizen journalism has both its strengths and weaknesses and I believe that it is an individuals choice to decide what sources to trust, read, believe or take-in. Mainstream media is often 'controlled' and misrepresents the truth or 'plays-around' with the story to adhere to audiences and regulatory bodies. All in all, I believe it is vital to have a variety of sources to help distinguish proper news and current events in all perspectives.

I know that I would be lost without my healthy daily dose of perezhilton!!