by Susan Kliebenstein

Created on: March 03, 2008   Last Updated: March 06, 2010

The Internet has sometimes been compared to the wild west. Traditional rules do not apply. Censorship has been vigorously rejected and very few safeguards are in place to govern the content of on-line content. Scams run rampant, hackers and predators lurk, and advertisers pop in from everywhere uninvited. Yet it is a goldmine of information, entertainment, and opportunity. This frontier has its own entertainers, marketplaces, doctors, lawyers, even its own journalist.

Every frontier has had had its journalists. From the writers of the American Revolution to the Muckrakers of the early 1900's citizen journalists have been the impetus for change. Exploring new ideas, making off-the-wall demands, and reporting from forbidden underground venues, the insights and information made available through citizen journalism is more important, and more abundant today than in any previous generation. But what separates the citizen journalist from the rest of the morass of on-line media?

Citizen journalists, though free of editorial restraints experienced by professionals, should never consider themselves free of the ethical values of journalism. The Society of Professional Journalists* identifies four broad principals which make journalism credible.

- 1. Journalists should seek the truth and report it, diligently, without distortion, plagiarism, or misleading oversimplification.

- 2. Journalists should minimize harm to sources and subjects, being compassionate and sensitive in the gathering of information, and showing good taste and good judgment in the publications of names and details.

- 3. Journalists should act independently by avoiding conflicts of interest, favoritism, or associations which may compromise credibility.

- 4. Journalists should be accountable. They should admit mistakes when they are made, and encourage public critique and discussion about journalistic practices and coverage.

This is only part of what the code says, but the four central points are sufficient to examine the question at hand. Should on-line citizen journalists to be bound by these same restraints?

I think the answer must be yes. There are many citizens writing on-line. We write fiction, opinion, advocacy, satire, advertising, rants and reviews. But unless the account passes through some legitimate journalistic filter it cannot be considered journalism. Ideally the writer is the journalist who appropriately sources and filters the information. If not, then any media outlet that publishes the material must become the responsible journalistic filter.

For example: YouTube is a media outlet, but it does not claim reliability, accountability, or even good taste! It is not journalism, but it is a host for personal expression and entertainment.

There are many citizen journalist reports to be found on YouTube, however. The trick is to discern the difference between journalism and jest, between credibility and inaccuracy. "There is one sacred rule of journalism," according to award winning journalist John Hersey, "The writer must not invent. The legend on the license must read: none of this was made up."

Can the writer offer this assurance? If so, he or she is a journalist. Style, format, grammar, spelling, and vocabulary all fall away to this single decisive restraint. Is it true?

Perhaps citizen journalism is not about the writer as much as it is about the product!

*http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp

Learn more about this author, Susan Kliebenstein.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.