I totally forgot to talk about the heated showdown between Amy Gahran of Poynter and an NBC vice president. It happened during a Q&A at the EPpy convention.
Keynote speaker Mark Lukasiewicz, who is vice president for Digital Media at NBC News, had told the audience that citizen journalism will never replace mainstream media. And then the fateful words: “A witness is different than a journalist.”
That must have sent self-proclaimed “info-provocateur” Gahran fidgeting in her seat with fury. She was the first to stand, mic in hand, to ask a “question.”
Gahran took an accusatory tone and laid into the VP. “Why do you perceive citizen journalists as inherently inferior or a threat?” she asked without pausing to let him answer. She complained of a, “perception that journalists are a priesthood.”
The VP somewhat calmly responded, starting with the accidentally condescending phrase, “Let’s understand what journalism is . . .” He said the citizen journalism movement shouldn’t be called journalism because it devalues real reporting.
Gahran fired back. And I do mean fire. She said a lot of NBC’s own reporters act more like witnesses than analytical journalists. They just stand there in front of a scene and tell viewers what’s happening behind them, offering no insight because the facts are still unfolding. How’s that different from bloggers telling what they see? (Her question, not mine.)
There was no diplomatic resolution here. Gahran made her point, and the VP didn’t agree that citizen journalists are anywhere on par with real reporters. In a world of user-submitted video, he said, there will still be demand for the likes of Steven Spielberg because he knows how to tell a quality story.


Comments (1)
Lucas,
Here's a solution I posted on my web site, thefutureofnews.com recently:
Finally, something journalists and bloggers might agree on. “Citizen journalist” phrase should go
Martin Stabe finds and Jeff Jarvis (thankfully) translates an article in which German Newspaper Publishers Association President Helmut Heinen irritatingly claims that phrases like “citizen journalist” are fraudulent because regular citizens cannot produce real “journalism.” Well, if he’s going to be that way about it, I don’t really care for that phrase either.
“Citizen journalist” implies that the truly legitimate position is “journalist” with the adjective “citizen” used as a qualifier to diminish status, as in Vice President, Lieutenant Colonel, or Assistant Professor. Come to think of it, “Citizen journalist” sounds like a phrase invented by a mainstream journalist — one who clings to the belief that, in the future, journalists will still hold the same, lofty status they enjoy today, but just with the additional burden of using, taming, and managing a swarm of pesky news “wanna-bees.”
Maybe it’s time for news bloggers to take responsibility for naming their own specialty — ideally one that would distinguish them from social bloggers on one hand and mainstream journalists on the other. If they continue to let Old Media-types like Herr Heinen assign them a name, no doubt he’ll come up with something, but Jeff Jarvis might want to do us the favor of sparing us its translation.
(Steve Boriss, thefutureofnews.com)
Posted by Steve Boriss | June 22, 2007 10:23 AM
Posted on June 22, 2007 10:23