The following was originally published on my Posterous blog “Digidave’s Quickies” – where I often collect my brain musings. I thought it was too good to just leave it there and wanted to see if others had thoughts on this conversation.

OJR had an interesting post out today that is making the rounds. But I see a big problem with it.

Their headline: “The pros and cons of newspapers partnering with ‘citizen journalism’ networks.”

The post was an aggregation of quotes from different newspaper people. All the quotes had good points. The basic rundown.

Pro = We can make money off of it.
Con = We still don’t really trust “them.”

And therein lay the problem: This is a one sided (us vs. them) newspaper centric conversation.

The important pros and cons of citizen journalism have much less to do with newspapers and more to do with…. life.

These are the pro/con I see with citizen journalism and the potential partnering with news organizations.

Pro = a healthy and vibrant conversation is good for democracy.
Con = filter failure.

Interesting the role that newspapers play in relation to this broader picture of citizen journalism.

Pro newspaper relation: Newspapers typically played this role and need to continue doing so and newspapers are hurting (although not because of citizen journalism). So the question is if newspapers are losing their prestigious place as the “4th estate” by recognizing that citizens can play that role without “the press” traditionally understood.

Con newspaper relation: newspapers respond to the filter failure by providing an authoritative voice.

Interesting that the relationship of the pro and con that come to my mind are reversed in their relationship to newspapers. The pro of citizen journalism can be interpreted as a con for newspapers and the con of filter failure can be responded to with a strong editorial voice by newspapers.

Just a late night thought.

(Funny that my last post was on having bloggers block and tonight this is pouring out of me. I guess I needed to clear my throat. I don’t want to be an annoying pontificator. As I said in my last post – I want to be on the front lines of all this. I’m a grunt, at best a squad leader. But to do so – I often need a clear vision of where and why I’m doing Spot.Us. If anything – this is an invocation to myself).

Clay Shirky is a wise sage in this era. If the revolution we are going through is akin to that of Gutenberg’s Clay Shirky is a Martin Luther.

I bring him up because most of what I will write below has been written by him in Twitter form. “The rallying cry isn’t ’save newspapers’ but ’save society.’”

Journalism is a loaded term. Defining it at times feels like counting how many angels can stand on the tip of a needle.

Much easier is articulating the goals of journalism. At its best the aim is “to afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted.” This is one of my favorite quotes on the purpose of journalism. Another is “to speak truth to power.” I’m sure others exist. What’s your favorite?

Journalism as a word is loaded because of the ministry it invokes. The profession that, since Watergate, has laid claim to it. That ministry is now a diaspora. Much like after the Gutenberg revolution the ministry lost its authority in interpreting the bible. Martin Luther showed us how. In reaction many journalists cling even tighter to that word.

But the word needs to be redefined.

I go back to Henry Jenkins who pinpointed why I dislike the term “citizen journalism.”

In some respects I dislike the term “journalism.” (My take on The Rhetoric of Journalism.)

Now before you get your tar and feather – here me out.

I love the idea of speaking truth to power. I love the idea of afflicting the comfortable and comforting the afflicted. I love the idea of communities informing themselves so they can make better decisions.

Journalism does this – but if we didn’t call it “Journalism” (with a big J) would it make any difference? What is at stake here isn’t an industry. Yes, it’s sad to lose an industry. We lost the button making industry when plastic button making machines were made. That was sad. We lost the horse shoe making industry when cars replaced horses. We have probably lost countless industries due to technical innovations.

But did we lose clothes? Did we lose the freedom to travel? Has our general progress as a world been forward towards more freedom and democracy? What is bad for newspapers might be good for the word (Yes – putting content online for free has caused economic problems for newspapers – but it has made mankind better).

And while we may be losing something in terms of robustness of newspapers we are gaining something new with citizen media (there’s that term again?!?).

People wonder if citizen journalism can replace professionals. That’s the WRONG QUESTION.

The silliness of that question: If Major League Baseball stopped tomorrow would all the little leagues in the country be able to replace it? If industrial sweater factories shut down tomorrow would knitting hobbyists be able to replace them?

Nobody would ever ask these questions because the goal of little leagues and knitting groups isn’t to replace their professional counterparts. Instead, they are to create a sense of community, a positive activity for children. If these non-professional activities disappeared could they be replaced? Could professional baseball play the role of the local little league?

So I ask: If citizen journalism activities were to stop tomorrow could professional journalists replace them?

Do I really dislike the term “journalism” – of course not. But it is so incredibly loaded. In another post we could discuss how it needs a re-branded (which is doubly-ironic, I know). We discuss this craft but readers don’t care what we call it. They care about whether it “speaks truth to power, afflicts the comfortable, etc.” That newspaper circulation has been going down since 1972 (well before the Internet) should say something to us all.

What we need to preserve isn’t newspapers. I’d argue it isn’t even “journalism” as we understand it. What we need to save is something else. Something more fundamental. The ability for communities to be informed with honest information and then to mobilize based on that information.

And that’s all I really have to say about that….

I’ve had bloggers block lately.

I received several suggestions on how to break it. So here I am, trying to follow up on all of them.

First: Write about something. Lower your standards and just write.

Perhaps the bloggers block also comes from my new Posterous blog aptly subtitled “Digidave’s Quickies: Not exactly a blog post. Too long for Twitter.”

I used to write personal blog posts here. This is space both for my professional thoughts but it is also my personal journal. Something I can use to remember funny moments and sad memories. From my Thanksgiving in Atlantic City to the passing of my grandparents. Obviously my personal life continues but I haven’t really written about any of it here on Digidave.org. When I started this blog I was 23. I am fast approaching 28 (AHHHH!!!!!). I can never tell what is or isn’t appropriate for this space. I look at Jeff Jarvis blogging his cancer and I’m inspired. At the same time – I’m no Jarvis. Nor do I have a life experience has heavy as cancer to share.

The deepest thoughts I might have are those of somebody who still feels as though he is 17 but is fast approaching 30. Laugh all you want – my peers and I have this conversation all the time. I think it is particularly strong for folks my age who are either the youngest of the Gen Xers or the oldest of the Mellenials. I feel stuck in between.

Suggestion 2: Do a round-up of things that have caught your attention.

By this I think most people meant a link-fest. Anyone that knows me should know that I am a big believer in aggregation as a way to serve the reader. But lately I haven’t had time to keep up with everything. So instead of a link to other articles I’m going to do a round-up of things I’ve been doing.

1. Publish2.com. I’m an advisor and it’s on my mind a lot lately. I’m loving the new interface for Wordpress (hat tip Daniel) and I think they are about to hit a nice stride with more tools.

2. NewsInnovation.com: I spent last week in New York. The timing was great because Spot.Us freelance Lindsey Hoshaw had a piece in the NYT. I was out there for the third New Business Models for News Conference. I helped to organize the first two with Jeff Jarvis. I helped with this third one as well – albiet a smaller role. I naturally stepped back to focus on Spot.Us. I could do a whole post on this conference, working with Jeff, etc. But intsead I’ll point to Jeff’s post about what was one of the better take aways.

3. Spot.Us launched November 11th 2008. It has been a year. I want to do an epic blog post about it. But I fear this milestone may go unrecognized if I don’t get past this writers block. But it goes without saying that Spot.Us is on my mind all the time. It is certainly #1 in my mind even if it’s #3 in this list. Also – I’m trying to keep focused on the redesign and not get distracted by all the student quiries.

4. That last bit is a handfull. I LOVE j-students. I want to hug them and encourage them in every way I can. I try to make myself availabe and as open/honest as I can. But lately it’s stating to take a toll. It feels as though I spend one full day a week answering questions for j-students (international or otherwise) ph.d students who are studying the future of journalism or doing Skype calls with students. Again, I love it. I want to encourage everyone to do their own startup. But every now and then I reach a limit and just want to put my head down and work. I view my working on Spot.Us akin to being on the front line of a war. I’m a grunt. I like to work like grunt. A big part of how I got to where I am is that I wanted everyone to consider me the hardest working kid in journalism. While working for Jay Rosen on NewAssignment.Net and at Columbia I got that reputation. I intend to keep it. Talking with students does help (me and them) but it is not my main goal.

5.  Broowaha: I bet you didn’t know that I am the editor of a citizen journalims site Broowaha.com. Well, I am! I am not exactly on the front lines of this site – but I am a part of the community. It keeps me rooted and honest when I discuss issues about citizen journalism. So no – I’m not just a talker, I’m a doer. And Broowaha is what gives me my experience in pure play citizen journalism stuff.

6. Life. Life is happening all the time. I suppose that is a bit of a reason for the bloggers block. It seems to be happening so fast this past year. Being in NY this last week reminded me of where I’ve been. This could also be a long post. One where I’d go over my fond memories of NY. Conquering certain things – losing others. All my friends who are in NY, which include a ton of my best friends from childhood, etc. I’ll spare you the sentimental dribble right now but a part of me just wants to let it pour all out.

Despite that last sentence, I’m actually going to cut myself here. As you might have guessed from the title of this post – I’m not sure where I was going with this. Then again, it’s nice not to have a destination.

I love analogies. This is a fun post that has been brewing in my head for a long time. I’ve been incredibly lucky in my young career to have met and exchanged ideas with fascinating journo-bloggers. I try to learn a bit from all of them. This is a fun ode to that.

What band/musician would I be? Or, name drop other journo-bloggers and I’ll add them to the list and come up with more musical analogies (If I am not familiar with them you should suggest what band/musician they might be as well).

Amy Gahran: Janis Joplin

Nobody could wail like Joplin. I often refer to Amy as a “force of nature” and I imagine Joplin was the same. Amy doesn’t hold back punches. She is passionate and will let you know exactly what she thinks.

Suzanne Yada: Alanis Morissette

First: You should hear her play piano, but that is hardly an analogy – she really plays piano beautifully. More importantly – Suzanne will charm the pants off you unassumingly. And when you see her in action, wow. As a practical example – she is a social media boon to The Public Press.

Susan Mernit: Carol King

Susan has given me incredibly wise advice since I first met her in person. Carol King lifts people with her music and gives them a broader sense of the world and what they are doing in it.

Jeff Jarvis: Pete Townshend

Arguable one of the best guitar players ever, Townshend helped usher in the era of MTV. The Who helped pioneer the Rock Opera and it wasn’t really understood at the time. “Talking bout my generation” is still an all time classic.

The CoPress Gang: Green Day

Young, in your face, and too loud for your parents. But that is EXACTLY what I love about this gang. I’m lucky to be on the board of directors for the nonprofit at the moment, but in truth, I only joined so I can keep my eye on all these kids. In a few years I hope they will remember me and hire me. I’ve now met a few of them in person. They are all amazing. Of those I’ve met: Greg Linch = Death Cab for Cutie,  Daniel Bachhuber = Dave Grohl and Joey Baker = Sublime

Howard Weaver: James Taylor

Smooth soothing songwriting. I imagine Weaver was one hell-of-a-leader; not by force, but by example.

Howard Owens: Lynyrd Skynyrd

Epic. Epic. Epic. And despite the amazing guitar solo’ing ability – humble, down to earth and practical.

Ryan Sholin: Bob Marley

I had to pick some kind of hippie band. I don’t even think Sholin associates himself as a hippie, but I always picture him in Santa Cruz. Plus – Marley was a living legend. Nobody can ever touch what he did. Plus, Marley just makes you feel good. Whenever I see Ryan I start to crack a smile. This guy gives me warm fuzzies all over.

Scott Karp: U2

An intelligent band that crosses generations. U2 is also at the top of the charts again – after almost 30 years of being part of pop music. Publish2.com also released a Wordpress widget, one of the more interesting media-related events this week (disclaimer – I’m on the board of advisors to Publish2.com).

Mathew Ingram: Barenaked Ladies

A Canadian band that kicks ass. You’d be suprised – they have some serious work along with the quarky. But even when they are producing humorous songs, they tend to be catchy and keep you coming back for more. I hear they are a great band to see live and Matt makes for good conversation.

Leonard Witt: Tom Petty

A living rock and roll legend, Tom Petty never fully embraced rock and roll over-indulgence. Instead, Petty is the rock and roll hall of famer that you can imagine also being your father.

George Kelly: Prince

Prince is relatively shy, but is perhaps one of the most talented musicians of the last three decades. The guy plays every single instrument. A testament to Prince’s brilliance: There is no bass track in “When Dove’s Cry.” I can’t think of another musician that could write a #1 hit without a bass track. Also – if you are ever lucky enough to hear George sing, he has a great voice.

Jay Rosen: Talking Heads

David Byrne and the Talking Heads were lightyears ahead of their time. Their music still captivates me. Byrne was also one of the first musicians to really embrace blogging.

Pat Thornton: The Clash

A punk band with pop appeal. Pat calls it like he sees it. He isn’t afraid of pointing out what is wrong, and despite criticisms isn’t a negative force in the journalism community, but gives it a good positive push in the right direction.

Steve Outing: Bela Fleck

A masterful musician. A bit jazy – Steve has been building a strong niche covering digital advertising and micro-patronage. If you ever have a banjo/jazz thirst, Bela is your boy. If you ever got a question about new online payment systems – check Steve’s blog.

Mindy McAdams: Dolly Parton

Okay – stop laughing. For those that don’t know – Dolly Parton is one of the best singer/songwriters of her genre and generation. Interestingly enough – her work has been a platform for tons of other songs (Ghetto Superstar comes to mind). Mindy is hands down one of the best folk to teach online digital storytelling and she has documented TONS. Much like Dolly, Mindy’s work is a platform that others can build from.

Brian Boyer: Beck

I often argue that Beck is the greatest singer songwriter of my generation. He is always unique. Every album shows his personal growth.

Will Sullivan: Devo

With a blog like Journerdism Will has embraced his inner Geek. No band can touch Devo in their ability to embrace the inner geek and turn that into a cult-like following of nerds.

Dan Gillmor: Bob Dylan

Dylan was a pioneer. He brought the electric guitar to folk. Gillmor brought blogging to journalism. Gillmor is the Ted Williams of journo-blogging in my mind.

Paul Bradshaw: David Bowie

One of the best to come from England Bowie has a style that is unique and commands respect. When you follow Bradshaw you can tell there is something brewing inside of him that he needs to get out. I suspect his new venture Help Me Investigate will be the equivalent of his Ziggy Stardust.

Adrian Holovaty: Django Reinhardt

Do I really need to explain this one?

Scott Rosenberg: Paul Simon

One of the greatest voices ever. Simon’s songs are introspective and enlightening giving us a glimpse into the American pysche.

Mark Glaser: R.E.M.

What started out as an esoteric college band turned into R.E.M. Their songs are beautifully crafted. Night Swimming is still one of my all time favorite mellow songs. Because R.E.M. is such a part of the music world they are often overlooked and taken for granted – as though they will always be around. They don’t just jam, they craft songs. Mark Glaser’s MediaShift is one of the most crafted blogs out there.

Marc Luckie: Pearl Jam

The occasional sensitive rock ballad Pearl Jam became famous for their intense riffs and grunge rock attitude. I grew up on this stuff and I think there is a generation of multi-media journalists growing up on Luckie’s 10,000 words.

Michele McLellan: Annie DiFranco

Having grown up with an older sister who shared a tape deck with me in our car – I learned to appreciate Anni DiFranco. She is one of the most skilled folk with a guitar. More importantly, her lyrics are mezmerizing. They give you pause and make you crack a smile at the same time.

Lisa Williams and the Placeblogger gang: Phish

They already had a cult like following when the time came for them to take the reigns from the Grateful Dead. I myself was a HUGE Phish fan in high school (yea, I was that guy). They jam out hard core but also write simple and beautiful ballads. Lisa Williams is probably the person I quote the most in talking about journalism. Phish, for a long time, was the band whose music I played the most – back when I used to play a lot of music (a future blog post may include old songs I recorded).

Who would these journo-bloggers be?

• Chris O’brien
• Steve Yelvington
• Jack D Lail

Hello friends.

As some know I was a pseudo-intellectual in college double majoring in rhetoric and philosophy. In my current situation I am against being too heady or academic. I have a bias towards action. As Matt Waite has put it, I believe in “demos not memos.”

That said, it’s my blog and I can be as hypocritical as I want and the following is a passage I’ve been reading and re-reading because it blows my mind.

So lean back in your armchair. Grab your tobacco pipe and put on your fez hat for a segment I will call: “Bathroom Reading with Digidave.”

Today’s reading comes to us from Jurgen Habermas. It is incredibly related to journalism and begs for rethinking since the advent of the internet. It is just the first section in a larger essay. Perhaps future Bathroom Readings will walk us through the whole essay. It is titled…

The Public Sphere: An Encyclopedia Article

The concept: By “the public sphere” we mean first of all a realm of our social life in which something approaching public opinion can be formed. Access is guaranteed to all citizens. A portion of the public sphere comes into being in every conversation in which private individuals attempt to form a public body. They then behave neither like business or professional people transacting private affairs, nor like members of a constitutional order subject to the legal constraints of a state bureaucracy. Citizens behave as a public body when they confer in an unrestricted fashion — that is, with the guarantee of freedom of assembly and association and the freedom to express and publish their opinions about matters of general interest. In a large public body, this kind of communication requires specific means for transmitting information and influences those who receive it. Today, newspapers and magazines, radio and television are the media of the public sphere [note from Digidave: What does the Internet change about all of this?].

We speak of the political public sphere in contrast, for instance, to the literary one, when public discussion deals with objects connected to the activity of the state. Although state authority is, so to speak, the executor of the political public sphere, it is not a part of it. To be sure, state authority is usually considered “public” authority but it derives its task of caring for the well-being of all citizens primarily from this aspect of the public sphere. Only when the exercise of political control is effectively subordinated to the democratic demand that information be accessible to the public, does the political public sphere win an institutionalized influence over the government through the instrument of law-making bodies. The expression “public opinion” refers to the tasks of criticism and control which a public body of citizens informally  — and in periodic elections — formally, as well practices vs-a-vs the ruling structure organized in the form of a state. Regulations demanding that certain proceedings be public for example, those providing for open court hearings – are also related to this function of public opinion.

The public sphere as a sphere which mediates between society and state, in which the public organizes itself as the bearer of public opinion, accords with the principle of the public sphere — that principle of public information which once had to be fought for against the arcane policies of monarchies and which since that time has made possible the democratic control of state activities.

It is no coincidence that these concepts of the public sphere and public opinion arose for the first time only in the eighteenth century [Note from Digidave: Being radically re-thought in how they are organized today]. They acquire their specific meaning from a concrete historical situation. It was at that time that the distinction of opinion from opinion publique and public opinion came about. Though mere opinion (cultural assumptions, normative attitudes, collective prejudices and values) seem to persist unchanged in their natural form as a kind sediment of historically public opinion can by definition come into existence only when a reasoning public is presupposed. Public discussion about the exercise of political power which are both critical in intent and institutionally guaranteed have not always existed — they grew out of specific phase of bourgeois society and could enter into the order of the bourgeois constitutional state only as a result of particular constellation of interests.

I bought stamps yesterday and as I left Safeway I had an epiphany which has long since passed. The following is an attempt to recapture it.

Stamps are a funny requirement. It is not a tax – but if you want to send anything through the mail it is just as guaranteed as death that you’ll have to pay for it.

And while the fees are small, they can add up. A book of 20 stamps is close to $10 now.What is also unique about purchasing 20 stamps is that they represent credits. I can use those stamps however I want. To mail bills, postcards, or store them away as prized possessions. There is a decision made for each stamp. There is transparency in how I use them privately (it is my choice) and publicly if I use them.

In a Sunday Digi-Dream I brainstormed about how taxes could be revolutionized online.

That thought process went like this.

• The government (local, state, federal) still determines how much money is needed for specific programs (roads, education, bailout)
• Individuals still figure out how much money they owe in taxes every year.
• The individual decides where they want their taxes paid. Which programs do they want to support?

The fun part is that the individual decides where the money should go. If they are passionate about education – they can donate all their money towards the education fund. If that fund is already filled with the money it needs, the individual must give the money towards another government need. This encourages people to file their taxes early (so you feel as though your money went towards something you believe) and might make the feeling of paying your taxes suck less.

Note: The shift in mindset. My taxes almost become a “donation.” While it wouldn’t really be a choice (taxes are guaranteed like death), it would be a choice about which government program my money goes to support. There is a sense of transparency, civic engagement and more.

Recently a bunch of newspaper execs met in a dark room to talk about micropayments.

I’m actually happy that something in the micropayment space might happen. I’d much rather a major company try it and fail then for the larger industry continue to debate about it back and forth for months. Somebody has to suck it up and try something.

But here is my advice: Add transparency and control for the user of where the money goes!!! People aren’t used to paying for the news. Charging somebody a small fee for access to an article they are going to read once is bound to disappoint somebody. Those people won’t become regular consumers.

In truth this notion of transparency and control over a donation is the real revolution of Spot.Us and why people continue to find it fascinating. Because we let the user decide and know exactly where their money is going.

It is the difference between donating to the Red Cross and donating on Kiva.org, the difference between giving to a sludge fund for educators or giving on DonorsChoose.org.

Giving to journalism isn’t new. NPR has been around for some time. But when you donate to NPR you are throwing money over a fence and hoping your money lands on good journalism. It is a donation of guilt or hope, but there is no sense of control or power on the part of the contributor.

Donating on Spot.Us is a choice that engages. It defacto brings the user into the editorial process and encourages them to be engaged throughout. They aren’t donating to a finished product – they are donating to a process that invites them in.

NPR could try something like Spot.Us tomorrow and blow me out of the water. So could any of these newspaper companies that are thinking about micropayments.

From Us Now: One of the best web videos on the power of web 2.0 and collaboration I’ve ever seen. Includes lots of smart web folks like Shirky,  Leadbetter and Tapscott – and also does a great job of going in-depth into web phenomena like CouchSurfing, MyFootball Club and Peer to Peer lending.

If you are already a web-head it won’t be anything new. I think this video is more to convert folk. But even if you are already a convert to the idea of collaboration on the web – this is an inspiring video.

Us Now from Banyak Films on Vimeo.

For those keeping track….

• First new job description: “professional news recomender.”

(That’s not a joke – I actually had that job for a bit with AOL).

• Second new biz model: The newsroom cafe.

Update: In Berlin the Taz newspaper already does this. The newsroom’s bottom floor is a public cafe and they advertise one might see reporters or editors on their lunch breaks.

Reading a post from Mark Potts about an interesting experiment in Iowa my brain had a fart of an idea. Or maybe it is just too late again (still adjusting back to the time difference).

Here it is.

Ever seen live customer support via chats on a website? Go to Provides Support or KariChat for a semi-example. Google launched a free version of one of these for bloggers in 2008. I played with it for a bit, but found it a distraction. But if I had a staff, or an intern, why not just leave it up and have someone dedicated to answering questions of site visitors all day?

Not “Dear Abby” but “Dear reporter.”

The reporter is marketed as human powered search.

People are coming to my news site for information, right? If they can’t find it – they most likely will leave and try the all knowing Google. But what if they could type a quick question to a real live person: “Hey, what is going on in my neighborhood.” And the person on the other end would say “What type of news do you want? Looking for food, a bar, or just recent events?” Turns out the person just wanted to know what the local little leagues are. A tough question, but the person on the other line is a professional info-searcher. They know about everything from EveryBlock to Yelp, to SeeClickFixm and how to search those annoyingly complex city sites and are quick to manipulate the gazillion FireFox extensions that help them do their job fast.

A few minutes later – customer gets an email with a list of local little leagues curated by an actual person.

Who does this now? Mahalo.

I haven’t kept up with Mahalo – but for awhile they had hired experts (think Squidoo) and you could Tweet @mahalo a question and they’d give an answer: Human powered search.

But much like Google – it doesn’t leverage the local. Newspaper have an edge here. Just as Google could never open a coffee shop hang-out in every town, Mahalo could never have an expert in every city or town.

What I suspect will happen: Every local town will have an independent blogger who fills this role of “ask a question, get an answer” whether or not they use chat software (think Chris Prillo but instead of talking Geek, they talk “Miami, New York City, etc” all day. An ambitious newspaper could invest in it now (assuming they had money of course).

I realize the realities involved: For this to work you’d need

1. A good hire – a quick, smart, well-rounded individual. Those aren’t hard to find.
2. The right positioning (framing this as a place to ask questions – not to report conspiracy theories or complain).
3. A news org willing to try this.
4. I mean – they’d have to rock out with it and promote this on their front page.
5. Enough market penetration in your home town to continue to merit the job.

I suspect three and four above would never happen.

But it makes for an interesting sci-fi scenario where every paper has a community journalist who doesn’t report the news – he/she answers questions for the community. Now is that so bad?

P.S: Maybe this is what Daniel Victor is already doing in some respects? Not directly – but I think his project is a move in this direction. He responds more directly to what the community asks/wants to know.

In September 2007 I laid out my definitions for “Networked Journalism” vs. “Citizen Journalism” vs. the myriad of other names for social media in the news world.”

I’m not trying to prescribe anything – just sharing how I use these words because it helps me think through what is happening online and where Spot.Us stands (look for the joke at the end of this LONG post).

That 2007 post landed me a small freelance piece for the Press Gazette where I wrote a cleaner version: “Time Citizen Journalism Pulled its Act together.” As noted – the original post was inspired by  Steve Outing’s Poynter post 11 Layers of Citizen Journalism.

It is time to revisit these definitions, update them, and add explanations to what I mean when I use certain phrases like “journalism is a process, not a product.” In reading through all of them – I hope one can see how they play off each other in my mind.

My definitions and updates for

• citizen journalism
• Stand-alone Journalism
• Pro-am Journalism
• Networked Journalism (including “Distributed Reporting.”)
• Open Source Journalism (including the re-release of stories and content sharing).

And I try and explain what I mean when I say….

• Journalism is a process – not a product.
• Collaboration is Queen
• Media is an act of community organizing
• Community Funded Reporting
• Journalism will survive the death of its institutions.
• Hyper-local
• Computational Journalism
• New Media skill set
• New Media mind set
• Journalism (yes… I get that bold)
• Professional journalism

“citizen journalism”

Update: Boss Rosen defines citizen journalism as such: “When the people formerly known as the audience employ the press tools in their possession to inform one another.” The reason I wrote my initial post in 2007 was because this definition (although not articulated at the time – it was in the ether) is too broad. It defines a class of acts. What he is describing is Citizen Journalism with a capital “C.” I tend to avoid this term because it clashes with “citizen journalism” which I describe below, as an act that happens under very specific circumstances. I tend to refer to the class of acts as “Participatory journalism.” Here’s why.

Old def of citizen journalism: This is the catch phrase that started it all. “Citizen journalism” with a capital “C” refers to an entire class of terms, and hence some of the confusion. If we are talking about a single act of “citizen journalism,” we most often are discussing an individual, who is not a paid journalist, who bares witness to a newsworthy event and broadcasts it. Acts of citizen journalism in this sense happen by mere coincidence. People are everywhere and when disaster strikes, someone usually has a camera.

Examples: Oscar Grant shooting, London train bombings, terror attacks in India.

“Stand-alone journalism”

In contrast to citizen journalism, this is when the individual isn’t reporting out of happenstance. The reporter, who is not acting as a “professional,” (see below) made a conscious choice to go out and report on a topic. This term was coined by Chris Nolan at Spot-on.com. Many people still refer this to fall under the class of “Citizen Journalism (with a big C) but that starts to confuse citizen journalism acts that are happenstance. I call this “stand-alone journalism” which is under the class of “Participatory Journalism” – but it is not “professional.”

Update: These might also be called “Placebloggers.” One of my favorite stand alone journalists in San Francisco is N Judah Chronicles. To my knowledge this blog is a passionate hobby, not part of the author’s profession.

“Pro-am Journalism”

The most basic form of “Citizen journalism” that news organizations tend to engage in is when professional and amateur journalists work together. It occurs through basic comments on an article – when those comments add extra information or new views that the original writer left out. These comments can be an incredible source of value to a story and are very easy to invoke. This is the basis of “pro-am journalism” but it extends to include more (below). Reporters need to learn the art of community management; and acknowledge that they now have a nuanced relationship with readers and must repeat, every day, “my readers know more than I do.”

“Network journalism”

Although it hasn’t reached its full potential, the idea is to organize groups of people through the internet to work on a single story. Like stand-alone journalism, it is a conscious decision, but large groups, rather than a lone reporter, do the work. Networked journalism rests its fate on two principles: the “wisdom of crowds” – the idea that collectives can be more intelligent than individuals – and “distributed reporting.”

Update: This is often espoused by Jeff Jarvis and I believe it is what Dave Winer often describes in his posts on the future of news. Almost two years later I still don’t think network journalism has reached its full potential, which is to say, we can expect more and better coverage in this fashion. I think what is needed are mature platforms that can allow groups of like-minded individuals to find each other and do “distributed reporting.”

Distributed Reporting

The art of organizing an online work flow, so that volunteers are efficient and happy to donate time to commit acts of journalism that in aggregate helps produce news. In distributed reporting – the work load is spread out. This is contrasted nicely with “community funding” where the cost of reporting is distributed.

“Open source journalism”

Like networked journalism, these projects are collaborative. They have multiple points or “sources” of information. But open source journalism adds an important element. Either a) the re-release of stories or b) sharing information among competitors. These factors make a project “open.”

Update: I think we are starting to see the emergence of this. ProPublica, the new Huffington Post investigative arm and Spot.Us all make content available to be republished. What happens when everyone starts doing it? We focus less on “scoops” and more on collaboration.

The re-release of stories

In networked journalism, people work in collaboration on a single story. In open source, they work together on a story that is constantly refined and republished in public. Imagine a journalist who releases a story to the public. Then, using participatory or networked journalism, more reporting and information is added and the story is reworked and republished. This method can produce amazing results. Covering an election, you’ll need a definitive story once the results are in. An open source story will feel very anti-climatic. But covering development in a community, the story will probably last several months, lending itself to new versions.

Update: Not unlike this blog post where I started defining these terms for myself. This would be the third release of it.

Sharing information:

While this has major potential, it has yet to be realized. Imagine 100 newspapers covering the same topic: “Local effects of global warming.” Each paper covers its own neighborhood, gathering the same information, local bird migration, average temperatures and more. Each paper would have a story serving its local readers, but if it shared that information with the other 99 papers, they could create a national view of global warming. You lose the scoop, but you get to be part of a story that is greater than that which your single paper could ever produce.

Update: See “What happens to my recyclables” on Spot.Us. Now imagine we raise $4,000 instead of $400. We hire ten reporters to do this story in ten different cities – all sharing their methods and ideas, so the finishes package is better than the sum of its parts. Spot.Us in this sense becomes the SourceForge of how to do this story. I also think that the move of ProPublica and Huffington Post to share their investigative work with newspapers is incredibly interesting and, not to pat myself on the back, validates a lot of my early thoughts on sharing of content. Scoops have the half life of a link. Being the first one to cover a story is not nearly as cool as being one of ten or more organizations to all cover a story together.

Phrases

Journalism is a process – not a product.

Newspapers, TV shows and magazines are products that contain journalism. But journalism is a process. It is a series of acts one does to collect, filter, distribute and add value to information. Journalism is never finished. Even when you package a story in a newspaper – the story is not done. Stories are never open and shut cases. They develop over time and this can be reflected in the re-release of stories.

Collaboration is Queen

Analogy is of a chess board: Content is king (the most important) but collaboration is queen (the most powerful.

Extending the analogy

• Rooks are technology (I love Casteling as a first move)
• Bishops are your project managers – either technology or community.
• Knights are your editors/reporters
• Pawns are your community (and can become queens if you get them to the other side of the board)

Media is an act of community organizing

I missed the 60’s – but I hear they were awesome! When you wanted to make a change back then, you’d get a bunch of people together and picket something. That still occurs.

But a YouTube video can be the modern march. Many YouTube videos are made with this in mind. It is media – but it is also a force of change. Before you whine “that it is all bias and unfair,” consider a well accepted motto, that journalism is supposed to “comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.” Also – get off your high-horse.

Community Funded Reporting

Distributing the cost of hiring a journalist across many different people. This can be contrasted with distributing reporting – where the work load is spread out. It is a new business model. Nothing else about the journalism changes. It is contrasted with micro-payments which are related but distinct because there is transparency and control about where the money goes.

“Journalism will survive the death of its institutions.”

One of my all time favorite quotes. The rallying cry should be “save journalism” not “save newspapers.” It is a mistake to conflate the two. Journalism is a process (see above) that can and will survive the death of its institutions.

Hyperlocal

I hate the word “hyperlocal.” I don’t know why “local” isn’t enough. For me hyperlocal is a word used to avoid having to say “community.” We should be doing “community journalism” not “hyperlocal.” When I read hyperlocal – I often replace it with “community” and don’t need to skip a beat.

Computational Journalism

An evolution of NICAR or database journalism. The world is filled with data sets. Computational journalism turns these data sets into something digestible. Think info graphics. More than that, however, the data becomes interactive. One can easily slice and dice the data through their computer to find the information that is most relevant to them. Adrian Holovaty’s work are great examples as are Matt Waite’s and Derek Willis. Having the programming skills of a second grader (maybe today that isn’t so bad now) this is probably the field of journalism I am least involved in, but I respect it greatly. There is also something to be said for the name: I believe Adrian has said he doesn’t like the term “computational journalism.” But I go back to the disclaimer at the top – these are the terms/defintions I use. I am not prescribing them to anyone.

New Media skill set

This is now 1/2 of what journalist schools are repeating over and over again. We need to teach “new media skill set….” For me this boils down to digital storytelling. In Greek times oration was the only way to tell a story. And some individuals got really good at it. Jouranalism consists of stories and ideas. Telling a good story is an art and a new media skill set means being able to tell stories well online. This includes photos, video, audio and more.

New Media mind set

The other half of what journalist schools say they need to teach “… and new media mind set.” Too often, however, I get the impression that journalism professors think that teaching a “new media mind set” is to make sure students keep in mind they need a “new media skill set.” The two are very different. A new media mind set means engaging with readers. It means using tools like blogs, twitter, social news sites like Digg or Reddit, blip.tv and other free networking sites not just to tell your story (skill set) but to engage with communities on their level.

Journalism

Journalism is a process: Collecting information, filtering information and distributing information. Often this consists of analyzing information to add value or meaning ie: with all this information here’s why it is important. It also includes caveats: the information must be accurate and throroughly researched. Through this process journalism takes the form of stories and ideas.

Professional Journalism

“When somebody makes money doing journalism.” Analogy – if somebody plays guitar on the streets for money – they are professional musicians (just not very successful ones). Doing something with the intent and expectation of being paid makes one a professional journalist.

Simple, right? So why did I feel the need to define it as such?

Occasionally I hear people say “professional journalism” when they mean “good journalism” because they equate the two. They say: “Yes but this is ‘professional journalism.’” Note: citizen journalism can be good and professional journalism can be bad.

I love the folks at Public-Press, so I hope they don’t mind me using them as an example.

I often hear the Public-Press refer to what they do as “professional journalism.” At the same time, however, the Public-Press, except for one individual, is run by volunteers. Most of the content they publish is produced for free or is from Spot.Us. Since Spot.Us’ content is paid – I would argue that this is the “professional” content they have. That said – I think A LOT of their content is good. Either way an ex-journalist who is volunteering at the Public-Press is now a stand-alone journalist. And guess what – there is nothing wrong with that. Don’t ghettoize it!

People also refer to Spot.Us as “citizen journalism.” Spot.Us is, without a doubt, participatory. I wouldn’t have it any other way. But the content we produce in the end is made by reporters who get paid. So the finished work is not citizen journalism – although citizens are involved in every step of the process.

Social Media Expert

A jackass that is trying to get hired so they can sell you snake oil.

So how do I describe Spot.Us? Simple….

“Spot.Us is participatory journalism that believes journalism is a process not a product, funded through community organizing efforts. We strive to use networked practices and open source principles, enabling stand-alone journalists to reach further and become professionals, pushing content sharing among news organizations so that collaboration can produce powerful stories of distributed reporting. The endeavor is run by David Cohn who is a social media expert.

I need to work on my elevator pitch

Twitter turned three years old recently and I celebrated my two-year twitter anniversary. Also – last November I had my three year blog-birthday (First posts in 2005).

Looking at my early blog posts and Tweets are informative to me now. You can tell in the beginning I wasn’t sure what to do. My first @ message was to my friend Mary Specht and it was a complete accident (start at the bottom of the Tweet feed below to see the first tweets). My second post was a massive throat clearing. My fourth blog post was about Digg and how I used it to find original stories. The irony today being that anything on Digg is already old news. My fifth post was pure satire (I am officially over Amanda Cogdon)

Regardless of what you Tweeted, blogged, etc – it is important to take a step back and look at how you first engaged with these tools. Hindsight being 20/20 what would you do differently? How can this help one prepare for adapting to use the next tool that comes around? Because there will be a next tool. Remembering what it is like to have fresh eyes, how would you design your own startup to change journalism?

On a p.s: Also interesting is how you remember things better when you have jotted down notes like this. The lunch, for example, was with MrBabyMan – now the #1 Digger in the world. A community which, I’m sad to say, I’ve fallen out of touch with since Spot.Us turned my life into a whirlwind.

Then you might notice my “Useless Mutant Power” meme. That is in reference to my guilty pleasure blog “Useless Mutant Powers.” Yes – even my hobbies are nerdy. More than anything, however, this side-blog and my early Tweets were baby steps.

What baby steps did you take and how might that of influenced where you are now?