I, like many, are in disbelief over the way Katrina's aftermath has ravaged New Orleans and ripped one of America's great cities from its moorings. But I do take courage in how many of my fellow journalists have kept to their task, and instead of just packing it in are using all their energies and every means possible (especially the web and reports of citizen journalists) to get out the word on what's happening. For me, Katrina is good evidence of the symbiosis between the struggling corps of traditional journalists and the growing cadre of new citizen journalists. Here's what I mean:
One of the most extraordinary aspects of online coverage from New
Orleans, for example, is the community contributed
"Our Stories" page
on NOLA.com (the web site affiliated with the New Orleans
Times-Picayune). It's a frequently heart-breaking array of pleas for
news about and aid for missing and stranded victims of Katrina and the
flooding.
On a national scale, CNN seems to have recognized the powerful array of content that citizen journalism can bring to a story of this magnitude, by not only providing a simple "send us your story" email form, but also separate ways to submit audio-video-multimedia and to submit requests for help for loved ones.
And yet, as a journalism student at Missouri named Jeremy acknowledges in his blog, there are limits to what citizen journalists in the thick of things can provide, so that traditional journalists clearly retain a critical role:
"If anything, catastrophes like this show there is a role for the mainstream media. Citizens are on the ground, but they don't always know "big picture" things like how the feds are providing relief effort, what is being done, or even the state of the town. But, they are providing interesting slices. Aggregated together, they help form a whole. Journalism needs the citizen journalist, and vice-versa."
A perfect example of what Jeremy's talking about re missing the big picture (but also of having the iron to acknowledge the shortcomings of one's communications in public) comes from snoopbloggyblog, writing from inside the Houston Astrodome. The blogger came back to modify an earlier blog to correct some misimpressions he felt he'd left:
"*EDIT* - I've modified this post to be more accurate based upon what others have been saying. Mostly, I seem to have been unfairly critical of the Red Cross, when in fact FEMA and the city/county share the bulk of the responsbility. Reference will now be made only to "the organizers." Also, keep in mind that this was late last night/early this morning, and that conditions/organization is much improved today since people have woken up and mobilized. I guess, then, consider this a historical document more than a representation of where things are today."
Summing it up nicely is Kaye D. Trammell, who blogged through her experience with Katrina and now writes in an op-ed in tomorrow's (Saturday's) edition of the Washington Post:
"We on-the-scene citizens don't mean to replace journalism. We don't have the resources. But we can provide first-person accounts in our own voices of what is happening. Because blogs are so easy to create, they will only grow in number, and many will be covering crises in this personal way. ... Those who start blogs like mine do it for many reasons, but I am confident that the motivation for blogging changes as readership increases. We understand that we are trusted sources for firsthand information and want nothing more than to provide factual accounts of what is happening. Blogging will not change the world in crisis, but it will make it more human."
Comments