Arts & Humanities >
Citizen Journalism
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedAre citizen journalists more trustworthy than professional journalists?
Title endorsed in part by:
Results so far:
| Yes | 41% | 169 votes | Total: 413 votes | |
| No | 59% | 244 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesThis interesting question on trustworthiness between professional journalists and citizen journalists is, in my mind, predicated mostly on honesty. Both can be trustworthy if they present the facts, without the slanting the story one way or the other. So often the news stories are slanted to present the views of the news agency heads. Then their stories present just enough facts to sway the viewer left or right.
News agencies, at one time, took pride in presenting the facts of occurrences and left the persuasion to left or right to the opinion writers. Truly presenting the facts and allowing listeners and viewers to draw their own conclusions built the big news agencies into powerhouses in their own right. However, the power seems to have swelled their heads and distorted their views of how to present the facts. Unfortunately facts get bent, twisted, and mangled in news stories lately so that they resemble the stories gullible people gobble up from the tabloids.
A citizen journalist can be more objective and honest when they lay their stories out for people to hear or read. However, they face the challenge of fencing with well-known contenders in the battle to present the news. In facing that challenge they wear the heavy cloak of honesty and integrity and face the competitors choice of weapons and their greater backing of big' media and the title of professional'.
Citizen journalists, however, also have the rapier of greater trust handed them by people disillusioned by big' media. While the professional' journalists are hawking the views of one group of people, ignoring other views of the issue, a citizen journalist tends to dig deeper into the pile of data. Sifting through the disjointed, and sometimes dismembered pieces of data making up the body of the issue, a citizen journalist often adds pieces to the puzzle left incomplete by the professionals'.
Honesty and integrity, rarely seen in some quarters of professional' journalism, still exist in the beating hearts of citizen journalists. However, when a citizen journalist allows his or her stories to chase after an agenda that panders to only one view, honesty and integrity fly out the window. When honesty and integrity fly out the window, the cats of big media smile, feathers prominently displayed in their fangs, knowing that their slanted views are spreading, telling the public what to think. When the media, large or small, stops presenting the facts and allowing John Q Public to form his own opinion, they become a weapon of people who seek the power to tell John what to think. They then become just another part of an undesirable machine seeking to control the public on every level.
Yes, citizen journalists can be more reliable than professional' journalists, as long as they keep their heads on straight, their integrity intact, and present the undiluted, straight up facts. A lie means one must keep track of what story gets aired to whom, while the truth never changes. Citizen journalists that present the truth, without embellishment are definitely more reliable, and give their audience credit for intelligence to make their own decisions.
Learn more about this author, Heather Foster.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
To have trust in a person means that you have reason to believe in their integrity, in their word. Knowing that human beings are fallible by nature, with each of us guilty of betraying another's trust at some point in time, the task of identifying the most trustworthy group or individual should not be considered a cynical pursuit. Are citizen journalists more trustworthy than professional journalists? The answer to this complex question is no, however, be careful not to misinterpret the answer to mean that professional journalists are more trustworthy than citizen journalists either.
Considering the objectives of the citizen journalist and the professional journalist are different, it is important to examine them side by side in order to understand their perspective. The defining difference between the two types of individuals is money. Money makes the world go 'round, and in this case it makes the professional journalist write. Unless he or she was born with a silver spoon instead of a plastic rattle, the professional is writing to earn an income to make a living.
On the one hand, this is a good characteristic because it means that they are not necessarily vested in the subject matter. They don't care one way or the other about the topic at hand and are willing to report the facts as they are presented. Alternatively, the citizen journalist is intending to make a difference in their world, their community. They are usually more in tune with the pulse of the people and have an interest in how the people reading the finished product will react to the work. A citizen journalist has something to gain other than money. There are votes, laws, public opinions and policies at stake. The passion of a citizen journalist is strong and can have a negative impact on the piece that is written if a bias becomes evident.
Ironically, the same characteristics that support the mercenary and criticize the average joe are the same notions that will be evidence in the alternate point of view. It has been established that the professional journalist carries financial reward as the prime motivation for working on a subject. This means that he or she probably is not overly concerned with the depth of the material, the history involved, the mundane facts that should be considered before an article is presented for publication.
The professional is concerned with one thing; will it be bought, will it get published, and what will be the compensation. The money. The citizen journalist will be closely tied to the mundane facts, know which are relevant and which are not. The citizen will want the truth be told for the better of the community and is not concerned with money. Every stone will be overturned in an effort to ensure that the whole story is told and that all possibilities have been considered.
Simply put, it is not possible to say that one type of journalist is more trustworthy than the other and it must be examined on a case by case basis. Are you willing to trust the person with intimate knowledge of the situation and cares about the long term impacts of the story? Or are you willing to trust a professional who is out to earn money who is interested in reporting the facts and telling the story without bias? There are cases to be made for each option, and it is up to each person in each situation to make that decision on their own. Life is almost never black and white, instead falling somewhere in between varying shades of gray.
Learn more about this author, Charles Merrifield.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
