Moving on to some more general discussion of the field, “citizen” journalism is also known by a number of other names. Which one do you prefer, and why?
I prefer the term “new media makers” and J-Lab will soon be launching a Community Media Toolkit by that name. These new media makers are involved in both random and organized “acts of journalism.” Random as in the posting of eyewitness videos or photos of some catastrophic event. Organized as in launching a community news site that has an architecture of topics or beats. Not all citizen media makers aspire to do “journalism.” Some, such as individual bloggers, often don’t do journalism at all. Others produce content that has a lot of journalistic DNA. We do a disservice to emerging players in the new media ecosystem and to our own understanding of what’s evolving by lumping them all under one rubric. A broader name allows us to start to distinguish and codify emerging media players.
I’ve always had misgivings about the term citizen journalism, but have continued to use it. As for the term “new media makers” this feels a bit too broad to me. It seems that anyone who posts anything on line could be considered a “new media maker.” What I think makes citizen journalism special is that there is some element of storytelling involved (whether or not it adheres to journalistic standards doesn’t matter) and there is some connection and relevance to the community. This community connection is becoming even more important as newspapers go out of business, leaving small communities uncovered. I’ve always liked the term community storytelling, because it gets to the heart of what is really being done—storytelling about the community. Also, to non-journalists, this term is less threatening than citizen journalism.
ReplyDelete-Kirsten Johnson
In my work with the Hispanic community it has become clear that "citizen journalism" has a different connotation to those who aren't legal citizens. I like "community journalism" as it puts the focus on the subject of the journalism and not who is doing it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kirsten that "new media makers" is very broad and could refer to any content posted online. When Jan says that not all media makers aspire to do journalism, that's true. But if we are addressing content that focuses on public issues for the sake of building community, there has to be some definition beyond using particular tools for whatever purpose.
If "journalism" is too intimidating to people, storytelling could be an alternative. As we open up journalism to more voices and tools and outlets however, perhaps it will lose some of its power to intimidate. As "journalism" expands and encompasses the everyday acts that regular people engage in to share and report and aggregate and comment on in their communities, it may be a perfectly fine word to use for what we're talking about.