BlogHer: Citizen Journalism Panel (audio)

For your listening pleasure, here is the audio from the BlogHer session on citizen journalism (or whatever you want to call it) entitled: "Suffragette Journalists: Op-Ed Pages of Our Own."

LISTEN NOW! Right-click (Mac: Click-and-hold) to download the MP3 audio file. It's about 10.8 MB and runs just over 45 min long.

More about this session...

The panel included:

• Chris Nolan (Politics from Left to Right)
• Evelyn Rodriguez (Crossroads Dispatches)
• Anastasia Goodstein (Ypulse)
• Moderator: Lisa Stone (Surfette, and BlogHer organizer)

PHOTOS! See Waiting for Dorothy (Thanks!)

The format: All BlogHer sessions were run in the "unconference" format, which gives priority to audience participation rather than lectures. This session is an excellent example of how well this format can work.

About the audio quality: I recorded this particular audio file myself using just the internal microphone on my laptop. The sound quality is not great, but it should be listenable.

This session was recorded by the conference team, so I expect better-quality audio will be available as a podcast at some point either from BlogHer or IT Conversations. When that happens, I'll be sure to link from here to the better-quality audio.

My question: In this session, I raised the question, "Can simple first-person accounts of newsworthy events that involve no additional reporting work or perspectives be considered journalism?"

This is an issue I've struggled with since the London bombings, and I'm not sure how to answer it. I keep going back and forth. Think of it this way: The Zapruder film of president John F. Kennedy's assassination was "news" -- but did it represent "journalism?"

...I'm not trying to engage in a semantic debate here, but to better define which issues and skills I, Reporter should be addressing. I'm sure there is overlap between first-person accounts and journalism, but I'd like more clarity on the possible journalistic potential or role of first-person narratives. I think that discussion could yield more useful reporting from people who happen to be on the spot when news happens.

The panelists and several session participants shared their perspectives in this audio file. I'd love to hear your thoughts on this question too. Please comment below.

More notes from this session coming later. In the meantime, enjoy the audio!

Comments

[Evelyn Rodriguez]

Amy, Thanks for the audio & post.

I agree with not having a semantic debate: "I think that discussion could yield more useful reporting from people who happen to be on the spot when news happens."

In your previous post, I also agree with the folks that feel that the term "citizen journalist" is offputting. I was blogging prolificly for about a year when I found myself in the middle of a major news story.

I wasn't quite aware just how big (it's a local event at first that only reveals its magnitude in layers over time). I didn't even THINK of collecting "news" and doing "journalism". Or interviewing folks on the beach in the aftermath, on the boat over to hospital, etc. Only when I saw the my inbox inundated with "Are You OK?" did I realize I had to post to respond to assuage reader's concerns. Never realizing THAT would be my 15 min of fame post.

I identify with being a marketer, a technologist, a writer, a blogger, a lot of things. But not once did word "journalist" or "citizen journalist" flash through my mind. Now the other reason is because when an event really is personal, first-hand, then there are a lot of OTHER things on your priority list besides "gathering news".

I had a long discussion with Staci Kramer of paidContent.org the other day. She covered the Sioux City airplane crash. She gathered stories from the survivors "in their own words". She did the gathering, she did the interviewing (but in a style that allows them do most of the talking), and weaved them together. 'Mediated' but with a light touch. One year later she did a retrospective for TV to follow up on their lives.

We discussed "mediated" and "unmediated" writing/journalism/whatever. Not one 'over' the other.

I heard dozens and dozens of first-hand accounts in the few days after Dec 26th. I did choose which handful I would write about and how to present them. I didn't follow journalistic conventions (i.e. I didn't get names from my "sources"). At the time, we were simply having a conversation, not an interview.

The anniversary project certainly will be more 'mediated'. But I can't say it will resemble anything I typically read in press. Yes, there are themes, angles, hunting and gathering, sources quoted, interviewing/questioning & listening, but the intent is to remain conversational, informal, raw, personal too.

There seems to be some middle ground that individual bloggers without the secret decoder ring (i.e. J-school credentials) are striving for that isn't QUITE journalism, but isn't QUITE "here's my story narrative". I'll try to write more about this and would appreciate pointers. I like what Sandeep did at http://voices.typepad.com

Not quite what you find in trad media. Nor most blogs either. I know 'real' journalists, photojournalists, and documentary filmmakers interested in doing MORE of this style of work.

Thanks for hosting the discussion.

[Sandeep]

Interesting discussion…One thing I would like to add is that often the people we want to interview are not initially so enthusiastic about giving their time to something that won’t appear on TV or in print. At times, we did spend a good amount of time convincing people to speak for a project that would appear only on the Net—and unaffiliated with any large news organizations.

Srinivas and I used two opposite methods to get people to speak to us for our project about the Impact of India’s New Patent Law on HIV/AIDS Treatment. I pushed my credentials as a “real journalist” or as a journalism professor (depending on the person we were trying to interview); and we also relied on Srinivas’s long-established friendships to open doors. Srinivas has basically gone to India several times and spent months at a time with many of these folks. This helped to establish trust. Everyone was concerned about the privacy issues and fear of exposure because of the continued stigma of being HIV+ in India.

I also wanted to comment on the funding issue that Evelyn brought up on her site. I am actually a board member of the South Asian Journalists’ Association and helped establish the SAJA Reporting Fellowship. As the chair for special projects (no, I didn’t receive any assistance for the AIDS project from SAJA), I hope in the coming years to steer SAJA toward opening the fellowship to the type of work Evelyn is proposing. But before that, I will need to convince other board members whose bias is probably toward print and broadcast. I am hoping that the AIDS project will help the argument there.

I spent some time requesting $ from several foundations to little avail—I don’t think they understand the potential for this type of media. But as a greater body of credible work is posted on the Net from independent/citizen/activists (whatever the term is) journalists, I think we might see new sources of funding. We might want to put our heads together to convince some open-minded foundation about establishing such a grant.