by Charles Merrifield

Created on: September 02, 2009   Last Updated: September 05, 2009

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.