I just read an intriguing interview with Ray Hacke, Citizen Journalism Editor at the Bakersfield Californian -- an established print daily newspaper that has apparently made a strong commitment to fostering and showcasing citizen journalism.
SEE: "Narrative Journalism, CitJ and The Bakersfield Californian" (in Journalism Hope by K. Paul Mallasch, Jan. 31)
This excerpt, which opened the interview, caught my interest:
Journalism Hope: I like the fact you used the term "contributing writer." Did you
consciously stay away from the "citizen journalist" term? If so, why?
Ray Hacke: Actually, we did choose to stay away from the term "citizen
journalism." The reason was that we wanted average readers -- people who
have little to no writing experience whatsoever -- to feel like they
could have a voice in our paper, too.
The word "journalist" has some
heavy connotations to it. We felt people might hear it and think
they'd have to have some formal training or be thoroughly knowledgeable
about grammar, spelling, style, etc., to write for us. We figured that
might scare them off, and nothing could be further from the truth.
Our overriding mantra for citizen journalism is, "Journalism is a
conversation," and we want people from all walks of life to sit down at
the table and join in. So far, we've actually been pretty successful in
that regard. We've gotten contributions from writers as young as 12
and as old as 90, from janitors as well as doctors.
That exchange really got my gears going on a whole lot of levels -- especially the concept of conversational journalism...