I've spoken with many people about the concept of citizen journalism. Generally, people like the idea -- especially the part about giving neighborhood issues more public visibility. But then they usually pause and say, "Oh, but I really wouldn't know what to write about."
Your backyard can be an excellent breeding ground for stories. Literally. Mine certainly is.
My neighbors have come to call the area circled in red "Skeeter Hell." It's a largely unchecked breeding ground for mosquitos, containing ever-increasing pockets of standing water.
Here's how I came to see that there might be a citJ story lurking in this irritating aspect of my environment...
This afternoon my neighbor Deb and I drove to the nearby headquarters of the City of Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks Dept., which manages the land comprising Skeeter Hell. For the last few years Deb has been working to get city officials to address the local mosquito plague, with little success. Often she's gotten bounced back and forth between city and country departments.
At OSMP we spoke with wetland and riparian ecologist Don D'Amico. We were relieved that he dropped the bureaucratic facade and amiably brainstormed with us about possible ways to address the water management issues which often lie at the root of out-of-control mosquito breeding.
During this conversation, it occurred to me that the issues which have led to our local mosquito problem getting so bad, and their possible solutions, might well make a interesting independent news story. I sensed this because Deb, Don and I kept slipping naturally into recounting short anecdotes, speaking in the rhythyms of storytelling. The themes varied from bureaucracy and politics to ecology, resource management, the local golf course, and more. But it was obvious that we were all contributing different parts of the same story.
This one conversation certainly would only be part of that story -- but it did spark the idea and got me thinking in terms of coverage.
LESSON: Tune into conversations. When discussing issues, keep your citJ radar up. Surprisingly often people find themselves in storytelling mode. Conversations tend to coax stories from isolated facts, forming a richer context. When you start to sense that even part of a story is unfolding, make a mental note. The best journalism (even short pieces) is rooted in storytelling.
Not every story is worth journalistic coverage, but many are. Even mosquitos can have interesting stories to tell. It's okay for citizen journalists to start small.
This is a great initiative, Amy and Adam; I, for one, will be following along with great interest.
A "Devil's Advocate" question for you; at the end of this post, you say "When discussing issues, keep your citJ radar up" - which is good advice; but if one becomes too energetic, too *known* as a citizen journalist, is there a danger of people *not* conversing openly in the very way that sparks the story idea in the first place ("she's a journalist; better be careful what I say" kind of thing).
I realise that this probably comes down to a sense of balance, as much as anything; but I'd guess this is something that professional journalists are expereinced in dealing with, so maybe you could share some pointers on how to achieve that balance? (Or tell me that this is a dumb question, of course...!)
Posted by: Koan Bremner | June 20, 2005 at 11:29 PM
Good point, Amy. I think one of the great things about doing a local site is that nothing is boring.
I get a lot of stuff out of just driving or walking around. I see something and I think, Why is it like that? A little digging often turns up something interesting and unexpected. Example: I'm obsessed by trash dumping -- when people don't bother to follow the directions for how to get rid of a TV, and just drive it and dump it on the curb in front of someone else's house. I encourage people to send pictures of what we call "Sneak and Dumps," and it's one of the most popular features of the site. Which would be good as far as it goes, but digging into how we contract for waste services, and how what contractors take has changed and why, has gotten very interesting.
All from an abandoned TV.
Posted by: Lisa Williams | June 20, 2005 at 11:43 PM
I am trying to figure out, what is citizen-journalism. It can be a hobby or a profession. In a hobby it is enough to be read or to be heard. As a profession we need to get fame or money. (Fame or recognition is “money in many areas.)
So for everyone is important to understand why they are writing. (I am doing a PhD on this.) Also it would be good if your audience knows where you come from. In citizen-journalism a very big issue seems to be creditability. Does the reporter have a hidden agenda? (As if that would not be the case in traditional journalism?)
The point I am trying to get is, that one way of thinking of civic, citizen or public journalism is think of it as “Hide Park”. Your box is digital media. In Hide Park the speakers can see their audiences. We need to see ours in citizen journalism. The story might be from the backyard, but who is interested in listening to us?
Posted by: hannu leinonen | June 21, 2005 at 12:41 AM
Koan wrote: "A "Devil's Advocate" question for you; at the end of this post, you say "When discussing issues, keep your citJ radar up" - which is good advice; but if one becomes too energetic, too *known* as a citizen journalist, is there a danger of people *not* conversing openly in the very way that sparks the story idea in the first place ("she's a journalist; better be careful what I say" kind of thing)."
...That's a good point. Since I've been a journalist for most of my life, I'm probably not the best person to ask about that. I've always gotten funny looks and weird reactions for a variety of reasons all my life, including my journalism work. :-)
As for whether citizen journalists get that reaction, and whether it's a problem: I don't know. This field is so new. I'd like to ask citizen journalists about this, and whether it's a problem if it happens.
My experience is that as a journalists people generally are more interested in talking to me than not. But that all depends on how you approach the work, I think.
Good question, worth pondering.
- Amy Gahran
Posted by: Amy Gahran | June 21, 2005 at 08:33 AM
Koan: It's funny. Even when I was a "real" journalist, and got a paycheck for writing for a tiny local paper, people buttonholed me all the time. In general, they didn't like to have their picture taken, but they loved to talk, even when they knew what they said could go into a story, in fact sometimes because they knew it could.
I think whether it's a paper in a big media market or a very small one makes a difference. In the small places I've lived the newspaper hasn't been a Big Intimidating Presence but a part of the local conversation. There was less power imbalance between the people talking at the local coffeeshop and the people talking on paper.
Hannu brings up credibility and the "who cares" factor. On my local news weblog, humor is one of the main signals I give the readers. I write in a way where the reader can clearly see me, the writer. They know a lot about me -- that I live in town and have two children. They know I'm flawed and a little overcaffeinated. In short, they know that the blog is written by a person like them.
As for the "who cares" factor...this is something a lot of people have asked about weblogs in general. One of the things having a weblog has taught me is that I don't neccessarily know what will be interesting to other people. For instance, on my personal blog I frequently retype my watch instructions, because I don't want to have to remember where the little piece of paper is. Now, that's probably the most boring blog post in the world. But when we change the clocks back or forward due to Daylight Savings Time in the US, I always get "thank you" comments on those posts from people who have forgotten how to set their digital watch and are using Google to find out how.
This is not to say that I make no decisions about what to leave out, but it does encourage me to experiment more with content that would clearly not make the grade in a newspaper, where space and distribution resources make a lot of the decisions.
Posted by: Lisa Williams | June 21, 2005 at 09:24 AM
Lisa writes: "Does the reporter have a hidden agenda? (As if that would not be the case in traditional journalism?)"
I've become pretty cynical in the last thirty years so could well share Lisa's perspective, but I can tell what's news and what's not, which helps me some.
Back when I was a "traditional" journalist, the only agenda was to report the facts of events as simply and clearly as possible or discover as many sides of the story as I could and present them clearly. If I strayed, my editors would hit the paper with their red pencils and make it right.
All my training was toward reporting what happened and keep opinion out of my writing.(It's worth noting here, that two reporters from different papers would write stories that could make a reader think they were reporting on two different meetings, but that's what you get when people of different backgrounds hear through their own lenses--not agenda, but life experience coloring the reporting).
Lisa clearly is of a new generation when she assumes all journalists have hidden agendas. This generation has grown up with right-wing financed propaganda presented as news; and the advertising and PR of entertainment empires given to news outlets to be passed on as "news."
I'm sorry that our country has gone so far down the Goebbels and Disney PR path of
"journalism" that cynicism is the field of play for the 21st century.
News programs from commercial venues no longer are intended to inform citizens, but news is now a business profit center. Entertainment and advertising rule--even in the news department. There once was a day when the news shows on a tv network could run at a deficit and still be a source of corporate pride. The news in newspapers was paid for by the advertisers and the line between each was clearly delineated. I hope to see that day come again.
I live in a rural area with no cable or satellite service, and I would be even more cynical than I am, even as cynical as Lisa is, if I had more than three networks. As it is, I can see the 18 minutes of a '30 minute' evening news broadcast and come away knowing precious little of what's happening on the other side of the globe, but a good deal about Michael Jackson or Jalo.
When I go traveling and see what's being fed to folks as news I come home fuming and eating yogurt three times a day til my stomach stops aching.
Lisa, I hope you learn to get your news from the Internet and your entertainment from tv news, and know the sources of funding and biases of all. Then listen to BBC and, so far, PBS and NPR, for the real thing. The real traditional journalism.
And try not to become so cynical that you don't recognize propaganda when you hear it. And realize that "muckraking" journalists often are working to keep our planet from turning into an enviromental Max Headroom nightmare. There are some not unlike the historical Tom Paine, who realize the current political stew threatens to turn our liberties to dust. They want to wake up citizens to the facts before it's too late to take action. There are others who act as watchdogs over a government that talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk when it comes to protecting our health, welfare, and voting rights from scoundrels. Their agenda is to give you the news you don't want to hear in the hopes you will wake up and smell the coffee before you are sold down the river.
Sorry to lecture, but there are still real journalists out there who want to inform you, but you have to think instead of feel and learn to pick the fly droppings out of the pepper. Hard work, but any PhD student is probably up to it.
Bless you and hang in there.
Aunt Mary
Posted by: Aunt Mary | June 22, 2005 at 05:52 AM
I like the idea of experimenting. Lately I have become a ware of who much we copy others stories. In films it is easy to see, but I think we do it in written stories too. (I don't mean the actual situations, but more like the structure and content areas.) We have an understanding of what is important and how to story should be told.
If we can find a story from backyard, where can we find our personal way of sharing?
Posted by: hannu leinonen | June 22, 2005 at 06:03 AM
Dear Aunt Mary,
Lisa got a lecture that might have been meant for me.
Thank you for your passion. I do realize that some where are journalists that try to report in most objective way and some where is even an editor that publishes those stories and news.
But I know that newspapers and broadcasters have an editorial policy on what they want to cover. (More often policy is written by shareholders or at least influenced by it.) And in a very sensible way – argued like we need to reach a large target audience to serve as many readers as possible – and to get at much as possible advertising money.
Journalism and reporting should be independent, but it can not be. We as customers (readers) don’t demand it. Advertiser has more economical muscle than individual readers.
I apologise for my use of works. English in not my first language, note even second. I also might come from slightly different background. I live in Finland. Our range of journalism is very much narrower than in USA. (I’d say in good way.) Still I feel that the development of journalism is going in the same direction as in States. More competition drives newspapers and broadcasters to run after the same news.
But I am not hopeless about the situation. It is very much up to our selves. We can read lose stories and not so important news. It’s one way to entertain your self and does not cost very much either. We just have to be careful not to believe all what is written and also look for stories that are not in the critical eye of the media.
Posted by: hannu leinonen | June 22, 2005 at 08:06 AM