« What can/should citizen journalists do?... | Main | Citizen-j in Oaxaca... »

June 19, 2006

Rollin' the ball...

Now let's take a look at those questions Jay Rosen asked regarding "Users-Know-More-Than-We-Do Journalism." These are quick, first answers and are not meant to be exhaustive or even particularly erudite:

1. What kinds of stories can be usefully investigated using open source and collaborative methods?

Any. I say that because it seems to me that any typical news situation offers at least the possibility of using collaborative methods simply because journalists--pros or citizens--ought to be looking for ways to expand sourcing beyond the usual suspects.

2. Which user communities are good bets to be interested enough to make it happen?

That's the $64,000 question. I don't have an answer of equal value. But I think we can at least point to successful (def.: ?) collaborative efforts and say: "Those folks." In terms of local communities, I suspect we may find that Daniel J. Elazar's theory of political subcultures will play a role in who feels empowered enough to be interested enough to make it happen.

3. What will it take to start running some real world experiments that could yield compelling and publishable work?

Hmmmmm...I need to give this more think time than I have available right now.

4. What needs to be invented for this kind of journalism to flourish?

The good citizen. I'm not being flip. I'm completely serious. A public of the sort that wants open-source and collaborative journalism must be invented by the competent, ethical, and effective practice of journalism by open-source and collaborative methods. Good citizens emerge, then, by recognition--by identifying (inventing) themselves in the journalistic product. (Hmmmmmm...sounds like what the old-media professional product needs, too.)

5. What tools already exist, and how can we adapt them?

Read: The Elements of Journalism. Do what it says.

6. What attempts have already been made to do this kind of journalism and what can be learned from them?

To be answered by someone who is walking the walk...

7. What are the practical problems that will surely arise and what fixes exist for them?

"Circulation." See #4.

8. If we hired you to prove that, properly done, readers-know-more-than-I-do journalism can work, how would you do it?

In regard to the professional product, my first step would be to undermine the status quo and expediency biases. These biases are largely responsible for the notion that sources should be entrenched power and that news springs from entrenched power. I would issue each reporter a new pair of Oxfords (or appropriate footwear for the ladies) and require that they wear a hole in the sole in 30 days. I don't have a similar metaphor for using the internet wisely, but you get the idea. Ah, but what does "work" mean? Who gets to be pleased with the product?

As I mentioned earlier, Doug McGill, Jeremy Iggers, and I will be wrestling with the question "Who is a journalist?" for the Media Ethics Colloquium to be held in Minneapolis in October, sponsored by the Journal of Mass Media Ethics.

UPDATE (6-20-06): Sisyphus is the first to send feedback by the new system--asking me to do some more thinking and writing about undermining the status quo and expediency biases:

"Journalists are telling each other stories about themselves that are making them sick. So the remedy is to tell a new story about journalism that will help make journalism healthy again.” - James Carey

"The development of communications education is one of the singular achievements of the century, make no mistake about that, and it led to a body of intellectual work of continuing importance. But that development has not necessarily been good for journalism or journalism education, for journalism education must respect three axioms that students of communications all too easily ignore. Let me state the axioms simply and without elaboration. [read the rest] - James Carey

One of the stories journalists tell themselves is that democracy exists because of journalism. Not true. The causality is in the other direction. Democracy can exist without journalism, but not the other way around. I'm convinced that democracies have an interest in the health of journalism practiced "in society," much as the analogy of the old miners' interest in the health of the proverbial canary. The canary analogy made me think of Weldon Berger's analogy of the rhinoceros in the china shop and knowing the press has its politics right when the "bodies start piling up." Rhinoceros is probably a good trope for arrogant, ignorant, out-of-touch journalism. The difference between the canary and rhinoceros is also informative.

I'm busy finishing a final draft of an essay--due on 1 July. I'm planning to write more about Jay's questions and the BloggerCon discussion this week and early next.

Posted by acline at June 19, 2006 1:12 PM | | Spotlight