According to Shayne Bowman and Chris Willis, citizen journalism is the act of citizens “playing an active role in the process of collecting, reporting, analyzing and disseminating news and information” (“Citizen journalism”, 2007).
The Internet has brought forth a whole new meaning to news broadcasting. News is no longer produced solely by big traditional media, i.e. television, and newspapers. What was formerly known as the audience of the big media, is now able to take charge of their mediums of communication, especially the Internet. The Internet has provided a channel for the former audience to produce news and broadcast it in the public sphere. As such, the lines of distinction between producer and consumer of news have begun to blur. Furthermore, new technological gadgets like handhelds and handphones, enable speedy publishing of content onto the Internet. (Gillmore, 2004)
As for
Ideal form of Citizen Journalism?
Personally, I feel that the citizen journalism that STOMP does seem to bring about, is at its infancy. The news reported are usually lined with words from the editors to showcase the credibility of the news or to comment that further evidence has to be collected to ascertain the case. Although I understand STOMP’s concerns to make sure that what is published is of substance, however, it just seems too perfect, too clean. The editors are cleaning up the publishing of the readers, but does this encourage true citizen journalism? It seems more surface oriented and perhaps slightly superficial. Citizens post up their news but seem to have to attain STOMP approval before it shows up on the site. Is this meant to give the illusion of power to the people? Furthermore, STOMP does not incorporate political views.
A true medium of citizen journalism should be one “by the people” right?
It just seems to me that mundane events are being posted up and the issues that are discussed are rather stereotypical daily events. Instead, important political or current issues are left out. Perhaps, that is why alternative blogs are set up to voice such political views. This site is monitored by the government, through its hold on The Straits Times, so I wonder how it can truly be citizen journalism, by the people for the people.
Improvement?
I feel that true citizen journalism can occur in STOMP if controversial views are being published here. It is especially so if political concerns are voiced here as well. This is so that the people’s realities of news can be seen instead of the big media’s ideas of what is going around in our world. If the approval from the editors has to be attained before material is published, and comments have to be added in all the posts, how is it by the people?
Furthermore, I question if the idea of the government setting up a medium for citizen journalism may be totally feasible. If such a medium is created by the power structure, who can say what goes in and what does not?
All in all, STOMP does work as a forum for discussion of events, and the publishing of some news from people, but can it truly work as citizen journalism? I say, not totally.
References
Citizen journalism. (2007, March 28). Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved March 30, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_journalism
Gillmor, D. (2004). We the Media – Grassroots Journalism by the People, for the People. O’Reilly Media, Inc. Retrieved March 30, 2007, from http://download.nowis.com/index.cfm?phile=WeTheMedia.html&tipe=text/html
Home. (2007). The Straits Times STOMP. Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. Retrieved March 30, 2007, from http://www.stomp.com.sg/
No comments:
Post a Comment