Learning how and when to "put on your journalist hat" can be very tricky, especially for people who are new to the practice of journalism.
Citizen journalists function as both ordinary people and as journalists. Sometime the line gets blurry. For instance, imagine you just had an ordinary conversation with someone who's involved in an issue you wish to cover. What if you forgot to tell them you were also acting as a reporter during that discussion -- or if you only realized after the conversation that you just heard something worth reporting?
That's a very common and potentially risky situation. Here's my take on how you can handle it...
LISTEN NOW! Click that link to listen to or download the MP3 audio file (podcast). It's about 1.1 MB and runs just under five minutes long.
Amy, howdy! I've been following the ireporter.org web site, and I appreciate your making the effort to share ideas, instructions on how to become a "citizen journalist."
I'm curious about the nature of podcasts. For the most part, they seem to be interviews with oneself and/or others about a particular topic. Would short monologues--like the one shared at http://lms.saisd.net/blog/?p=50 be considered podcasts or not? I'm looking for the correct "form" for a podcast, but I'm not sure if there is one yet.
Please share more of these informative podcasts.
An avid reader,
Miguel Guhlin
mguhlin@yahoo.com
http://www.mguhlin.net
Work: http://itls.saisd.net
Posted by: Miguel Guhlin | July 17, 2005 at 01:44 PM
Is there a distinction between a one-on-one "interview" situation (which appears as if a private conversation) and a public group situation?
Presumably, unless you are one of those people with a photographic memory, a "good" CJ wishing to quote someone will either record the conversation or take careful notes, thus clueing the subject that they are being "interviewed".
Is there a distinction between reporting a literal quote and recounting the general thrust of the conversation? I suspect that the two should be treated the same unless the summary of the conversation would not result in the disclosure of any information or sentiment that wouldn't be available by interviewing any number of other parties.
As far as reporting on comments of a group in public, it seems like there should be a "third-party public discussion rule": If someone says something in public without any obvious intention to keep their comments strictly private, then those overheard comments should be fair game. For example, people chatting before or after a public meeting without any attempt to seek privacy. I would say though that the rule should be that such comments should not be directly or even indirectly attributed since it is a gray zone, neither strictly private nor clearly public prononcements as would be the case when speaking out (to the community) at a public meeting.
Maybe there should be a sub-rule relating to CJ conversations with strangers. If I know somebody, it makes perfect sense to get permission to quote or refer in any way to their comments since by default they will assume the conversation is private. But if I approach some stranger and start asking questions, I don't really think there is any presumption of privacy since only a fool would say something to a stranger that they don't want repeated. People frequently use terms like "Don't tell anybody", "You didn't hear it from me", "I'm not saying", etc. when they have something that they are wiling to share in private but are not willing to be quoted or attributed on.
Maybe this is more an issue with regular sources, the kind where you are likely to keep going back for more. In that case, you're likely to want to strike up a CJ "relationship" with them anyway.
And what about government officials and bureaucrats? Shouldn't they by definition *always* be quotable since they are by definition engaged in the public's business?
Just to clarify, this blog post refers specifically to "Quoting", without being clear about the use of non-quote information or sentiment from a conversation.
-- Jack Krupansky
Posted by: Jack Krupansky | July 23, 2005 at 04:14 PM
Amy, Is there any way for those of us who aren't set up for audio to read a transcript (or brief summary) of this podcast?
Related, Dan Gillmor's interview tips (and my partially-unanswered questions) at http://bayosphere.com/node/866
Posted by: Anna Haynes | August 14, 2005 at 03:41 PM
Anna, Sorry, I don't have a transcript for that podcast. Transcription requires time which I don't have to spare at the moment. If some I, Reporter reader wished to transcribe this podcast, I'll be happy to post it.
- Amy Gahran
Posted by: Amy Gahran | August 14, 2005 at 04:00 PM