Citizen Journalist or Eyewitness?

Today in class there was a presentation on the Journalism in the 21^st century, which talked about citizen journalism.

The Internet has produced the first generation of interaction between journalists and citizens, in the form of feedback, opinion and posting media, like ‘eye-witness accounts’.

One thing I thought was interesting was the conversation between whether citizens whose videos etc. were used in news were considered ‘citizen journalists’ or simply ‘eyewitnesses’ using technology.

I tend to side with the latter.

The way in which media uses citizen’s footage is consistent to an eyewitness account.

Take the example of the London Bombings in 2005. This was one of the first times where big news channels such as the BBC used citizens’ footage, such as the photo below.

From the BBC

 The photo shows people walking out of the underground after the bomb went off. While the photo was submitted to the news, it was in fact journalists who packaged it around a story, with other information, footage and quotes to make it a piece of journalism. Just like people in the underground would have been interviewed to get their perspective of ‘what it was like’ when the bomb went off, this photo is simply a first hand account of that.

This is just one example where it is possible that the person involved may not have captured the situation for the sake of news, yet simply because it was an extraordinary event. Perhaps if citizens were to take their footage and post, broadcast or package it themselves, we could call them citizen journalists?

On the other hand, the fact that technology has enabled citizens to capture events in way that would be considered for broadcasting may prove otherwise.

I believe that sometimes news stations use these eyewitness accounts, footage and photos for their unprofessional, rough-edged style, which tells the story more intimately (and perhaps realistically) than a high-tech professional reporter could.

Wanna know more about citizens ‘committing acts of journalism’? Learn more from professional Arianna Huffington below.

...But I thought I was a Journalist!

One of the first things I learnt when I started University was that there was a difference between ‘being’ a journalist, and ‘doing’ journalism. I was reminded of this when our tutor Christina did a presentation on ‘Who… Is a Journalist?’ And I have to say, after studying it for almost three whole years and starting to get into the industry myself, I’m still a little bit confused.

I’m not sure if I’m meant to aim to ‘be’ a journalist, or ‘do’ journalism. From my first-year perspective, I was meant to ‘do’ journalism, and the three-year slog through Shannon & Weaver, Zolberg, Thussu (and many other German theorists whose names I have trouble pronouncing during presentations) was meant to filter out the wannabes from the gonna-bes.

But new technology, media convergence, and a tech-savvy generation who know how to get their voices heard has meant an uprise in the amount of individuals participating in journalism, without even having a degree!

These days, University isn’t the only path to getting where you want to go. If you can use a computer, operate social media, post on Youtube and know how to edit along the way (which includes the latter half of Gen Y) you’re halfway there!

There are pros and cons to media convergence, like a lesser need for journalists, a greater need for current journalists to know how to do everything, and a more competitive market, but the plus side is that us Gen Y’ers may have a little head-start over the older crowd who’re used to writing in shorthand instead of recording interviews.

Which leaves me to wonder; perhaps I’m more drawn to the romantic journalist – getting out of the office to chase a story, writing in notebooks, ‘handing in’ stories to the editor, even reading the newspaper each morning!

The elusive journalist must look different to each person, and will continue to change as fast as Facebook replaced Myspace.