Taking Citizen Journalism to task: a professor’s wrong-minded idea

While Samuel Freedman, professor of journalism, Columbia University, makes several valid observations about Citizen Journalism, I take great exception to his statement that CJ is "part of a larger attempt to degrade, even to disenfranchise journalism as practiced by trained professionals." While it is true that some so-called citizen journalists thrive on any opportunity to play "online gotcha" with some politician's faux pas, there are others who view their blogged photography and writing as an valid extension of traditional news dissemination. Freedman himself references the London subway bombings and the various cellphone images provided by terrified passengers. Was this an attempt to "degrade" or "disenfranchise" traditional journalism? Please.

The fact of the matter is that public scrutiny of political hanky-panky, or gripping images from natural and man-made disasters are enhanced by the words and pictures that proactive citizens choose to upload. Without question, citizen journalists have taken us closer to the action, and have done so more quickly than traditional news outlets (see Katrina and 9/11). This, of course is because monolithic media understandably need time to become aware of and then respond to news, especially the breaking variety.

Thus, I pose the question: which is of more value, the cam-phone shots taken within seconds of a tsunami's ghastly devastation, or time-delayed images produced by trained journalists? The answer is that both are valuable for different reasons. The CJ images and words provide an immediacy that mainstream media simply cannot match. In these circumstances the story is photographed and reported on before authorities (and to some extent, the media) sanitize the scene. And certainly the later-arriving trained writer and photographer bring analysis and context to the unfolding events in a way no citizen journalism could or perhaps even should. And, for the record, I would hardly call youtube.com an example of citizen journalism (see excerpt below.) Let's call youtube Citizen Voyeurism.

The problem is observers who take an either/or approach when measuring the value of citizen journalism against the MSM. In fact, both are valid. Just ask those news editors who jumped at the chance to show images from London's smoke-filled Tube.

UPDATE

How does Prof. Freedman explain this?

CBSNews.com: Blog

To its proponents, citizen journalism represents a democratization of media, a shattering of the power of the unelected elite, a blow against the empire of Big Brother. Citizen journalism does not merely challenge the notion of professionalism in journalism but completely circumvents it. It is journalism according to the ethos of indie rock ‘n’ roll: Do It Yourself.For precisely such reasons, I despair over the movement’s current cachet. However wrapped in idealism, citizen journalism forms part of a larger attempt to degrade, even to disenfranchise journalism as practiced by trained professionals. As I said before, I appreciate the access that citizen journalism provides to first-hand accounts of major events. Yet I recognize those accounts are less journalism than the raw material, generated by amateurs, that a trained, skilled journalist should know how to weigh, analyze, describe, and explain.