Week 4 Blog

I. Citizen Journalism-Why we need it?

Recently I attended lecture of Pro. Mike McKean on Convergence. During the lecture, I found the concept of citizen journalism interesting. The term is new to me. In China, mainstream media do not have much practice of it. Pro. McKean talked about citizen journalism in the context convergence news reporting. We are in an age of fast development of multi-media news reporting, when audience increasingly defines and shapes the news. Good examples of citizen journalism are the first video of London Tube Bombing and images of VA Tech shooting, both of which are captured by non-journalists and uploaded onto the Web soon after the incidents.

Citizen journalism, or user generated news, is the concept that members of the public "playing an active role in the process of collecting, reporting, analyzing and disseminating news and information." (wikipedia.org). The idea is that people without professional journalism training can utilize modern technologies and the Internet to create, discuss or examine media contents on their own or with others. The intent of citizen journalism is to encourage democracy by allowing people to share independent, wide-ranging and relevant information.

In the US, people are enjoying and utilizing citizen journalism in many ways. They can write about an event in their community on their blog or in an online forum. Or they could post their comments of a newspaper article, and point out factual errors or bias via BBS. They may videotape a newsy event and uploaded it on a site such as YouTube. A major practice of citizen journalism in China is Tianya Forum, where netizens can enjoy greater liberty to express their views.

The new situation initiates two questions. First, how can “traditional” Journalists keep in pace with the development? When many traditional media are declining, journalists should embrace and shape user-generated content and culture. As Shook pointed out in Chapter 13 of Television Field Production and Reporting(P.244), community involvement is crucial to the success of TV stations. Actually, the rule is true for all media outlets including print and radio. Journalists should know that audience is more interested in their own stories or stories happening in their proximity. Citizen journalism helps journalists understand what the public care about. Journalists should explore new digital tools for more effective storytelling and put traditional journalism into personal media space, together with video, audio, photos and slideshows and interactive graphics and data. Journalists can also encourage audience to combine news with blogging, tweeting or other social networking tools.

Second, is citizen journalism is a viable substitute for mainstream output? Citizen journalism will not be able to replace mainstream output. A main problem in citizen journalism is that user-generated contents are usually in low quality compared with professional journalism. Media may not sacrifice the basic journalism standards to encourage the participation of the public. It is always professional journalists’ responsibility to maintain the quality and fairness of news. Furthermore, according to a research carried out by three American universities in June and July 2009, only 25% of the amateur sites published on a daily basis. Though some did have daily postings, they tended to have significantly fewer news items.

II. Improve with Each Story

I was searching on the Internet for artists who would present their work at the 52nd Art in the Park, when an electronic image popped up on the screen. It feature photo by photographer Kent Durk. The Edgewood Farm on the picture was built in 1902. I got an idea that Durk may be the central compelling character in my story of this event.

Kent Durk was not yet a member of Columbia Art League. Therefore, I did not have his contact information. I googled his name and discovered that he was on Facebook. On that day, I made contact with him and he replied, excitedly telling me that it would be his first exhibition at Art in the Park. Durk suggested that I visit the homepage of his studio “360icon” to learn about his photography. After visiting his Web site, I was very impressed by Durk’s talent and unique vision. Information of Durk’s adventurous team “Old Creepy House Explorers Club” and learning of his artistic style helped me do the story from the perspective of the artist.

I found the Internet a great source for searching background information. I did not have an opportunity to speak with someone from Columbia Art League. However, the official site of Art in the Park provided me with information about the history of the event, and a list of exhibitions and estimated number of visitors.

One problem with my story of Art in the Park was that it lacked a new angle. When I reviewed my package, I realized that Art in the park has a history of more than 50 years; therefore, the public must have seen local media’s coverage every summer. From the very beginning, I have restrained my thinking to covering the opening of the event, routinely assuming “sooner is better than later” because I would not risk missing the deadline.

KOMU did a reporting on the closing ceremony, which was different from stories in the Tribune and the Missourian. On the second day of the event, Art League released the names of the winners for Best of Show the following day after the closing of the art show. Emma Ginsberg, a 25-year-old painter, won second place. Ginsberg had her show in Emerging Artist Pavilion, which is new in Art in the Park’s 52-year history. I reached out to Emma and spoke with her two days before Art in the Park, but decided not to shoot her showcase and interview her during the festival. If I had attended the prize awarding ceremony on the second day; I may have done a more compelling story.

This experience gave me enlightenment. By comparing my story with published ones on local media, I got some idea of how to improve my writing and enrich my vocabulary. I saw what angles should be taken in the reporting of large event which happens each year. Another improvement was, I did my stand-up in a place with a lot of people, which I had previously shied away from.

With the sixth story, I was not confident with my coverage of the Standing Committee on Public Art. My story lacked basic information on the amount of construction cost, and an in-depth analysis of the committee’s decision on the design proposal for the parking garage. However, I learned a lot from the procedure of doing my story.

It was my first experience of doing a story in one day, which I had never tried before. Second, the focus of the story was different from the style of the stories I had done before. I had intended to cover volunteer events and art activities, but I became aware of the lack of my ability to report issues in public life. Third, I realized I had forgotten to change the background of my interviewees once I captured the video onto computer. I set up my camera in a hurry, and I was restricted to the corner of the meeting room to do interviews. However, according to Shook, it was not an excuse for bad video or framing, but an admission of failure. Forth, although I got two minutes of sound bites from two sources, I still found relevant bites workable for my package. It was very different from my previous experience of more than 20 minutes interviewing each person. Last, I was more confident with my stand-up, although it was far from being perfect. For my first two packages, it took me one hour to do stand-ups, but they looked bad. For the last stand-up, I tried three times before I was done.