My friend Merle over at Arkansas Valley Publishing makes good points in his editorial on Friday. However, in addition to the simple fact that people now have the ability to speak out, I believe it is the lack of quality and or objectivity in our trusted news outlets that has created the perceived need for citizen journalism around the world (all those who trust Fox journalists raise your hands? CNN? NPR?).
Ironically, this is often where citizen journalism, and the limitless resources and fact-checking that electronic media brings to the table, that contributes to a communities ability to better understand itself and the world at large.
Mr. Baranczyk makes the observation that “Through the wonders of technology, the new media – info sites, blogs, tweets, Facebook, etc. – literally anyone is able to post the “news” they choose to present it or to express opinions on issues.” I might add that we are also able to pick up the pieces when journalists make mistakes.
Fuse professional journalism with community experience and knowledge and, as an informed culture, perhaps we are onto something even more dynamic. However, it all starts and ends with credibility.
Regardless of the merits of professional journalism —and there are many, sometimes I am more interested in what my plumber has to say about my pipes.
Bill:
I think you are on to heart of the matter when you commented that we don’t necessarily trust the traditional news outlets.
I understand where Merle is concerned and wants to cabin the new media into a smaller and more subjective box than traditional media or journalism …
“Citizens presenting information and opinions, however, are not to be confused with traditional journalism, its values, standards and objectives.” But the fact is, I see bias among so many traditional journalism outlets, that it no longer really meets the Webster’s definition of “without interpretation.” (If it ever did – we could have a great discussion of the Hearst papers and the Spanish American war.)
I personally feel that it is incumbent on consumers of news, from whatever outlet, to consider the source and evaluate the “facts” accordingly. So much of what I see presented as “fact” is interpretation and projection. I see and read both locally in and nationally journalists telling me “I know they say X, but they really mean Y.” In todays world so much of the traditional media has abandoned any pretense of presenting facts “without interpretation” that it really is unrecognizable as the kind of traditional journalism that Merle identifies and defines.
In looking at new media (or any media really) we should ask the question – Do these facts help me to better understand the world I live in? I don’t think we can trust any one source to provide a full picture anymore, if we ever could. If there is such a source – could someone tweet me the URL?
Bill