Professional vs. Citizen Journalism
Nowadays, everyone can write their own blog, post clips on YouTube and can be really a journalist paid by news agency. It seems that journalists will lose their job in the coming future. But one thing we need to focus is that being journalists, they have their rules to follow in order to be a professional journalist.
To be professional, journalists should report newsworthy story. So it can gain more attention from the public to know the true and help newspaper’s sales. Another thing is most important. It is objectivity. It is about whether the fact of the news is accurate or not. If not, news will become lies and it hidden the true. It loses the purpose of news. Besides, journalists should be disinterest towards news. That means they cannot involve personal feeling or opinion in news. Also, journalists should find different sources before issuing news report and make sure there isn’t bias on that. Those are the practices and rituals of new writing. Moreover, news should be timely and free from suppress of identities like authority.
However, there are some problems that hinder the profession of journalists. For example, CNN admitted that it had practiced self-censorship in covering the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq in order to ensure continued access after the regime had thrown out other media. CNN correspondent Christiane Amanpour also complained of self-censorship during the invasion of Iraq due to the fear of alienating key audiences in the US. There are claims that the media are also avoiding covering stories about repression and human rights violations by the Israeli and Iranian regimes in order to maintain a presence in those countries. (Wikipedia, 2010) So self censorship and selective reporting devastate the objectivity of journalists. On the other hand, recent years, there is a lot of advertorials posted in newspapers and magazine. Those materials are given by advertisers. Indeed, public may not know very well about those things are created by product company. If there is fraud of the advertorials, people may blame newspaper publishers they are being not professional at all.
In contrast, to be citizen journalists, they can report news with newsworthiness like Bus Uncle. But when it comes to the point of objectivity, I don’t think citizen journalists can finish this task. As citizens nowadays mainly are bloggers, they write blog to express their feeling, daily matters or comments about news. It involves personal feelings, bias and judgments in their blogs.
What’s more, citizen journalists don’t have huge capital, human resources, equipments and technology to report, record, transmit and edit news. So there is a gap for citizen journalists to be professional journalists. On top of that, professional journalists are hired by news agency. Their social roles are reporting news and following the code of conduct by the company. Also people will expect professional journalists reporting the true. It is the social norm for journalists. Nevertheless, citizen journalists are not bounded by that. So they are free from social norm and people will not expect much at them. Also, they are not hired by company. So they don’t need to follow the code of conduct.
All in all, I am doubt about citizen journalists can be professional journalists. However, there is a way for two parties to cooperate like citizen journalists can get the first hand information and give to journalists who are profession in reporting to report the news. Thus, they perform different functions. At the end, they are helping each other but not completing. I think no one can predict how journalism will be in the future. It lets time tell what will happen.
Source:
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism)
2/22/2010
Y2K: The Hoax of the Century?
by Ming Fearon and Jacqueline Wang
It’s hard to believe that the 21st century started a decade ago, but we vividly remember the chaos that accompanied the year 2000. The problem lay in the fact that with digital software, dates were often stored only as the last two digits of a year (in the MM/DD/YY format). With a change into the new century, it was possible that computers that stored important information, such as financial or security statements could confuse or lose data, or even stop working entirely.
Due to the panic, many companies responded by extensively updating and checking their software. Some experts contributed to the panic by making incendiary comments about Y2K. The Deputy Secretary of Defense of the United States at the time even went as far as to say “The Y2K problem is the electronic equivalent of the El Niño and there will be nasty surprises around the globe.” Others countered that the situation would not be as dire as rumors would have it, especially if the right precautions were taken.
It seemed that the majority of the public seemed almost determined to ignore experts’ attempts to placate their fears. This sort of fear mongering relates back to our past couple of blog entries, where we’ve concluded that the media both creates and manipulates public fear. The Y2K bug was a valid source of worry to be sure, but the media was an obsessive rumor mill and constantly churned out new stories about Y2K that were based almost solely on “expert opinions.” These opinions consisted often of little more than speculation, but because Y2K was such a hot topic, the public ate these stories up.
We were only eleven years old at the time, and we watched as adults around us panicked about a possible technological collapse. In response to these rumors, we heard of people buying numerous packs of batteries, gallons of bottled water, and even canned food. Some even went as far as to set up shelters in their basements, in the inexplicable fear that all electrical technology would suddenly fail the second the clock struck midnight. While our families worried about the possibility of such an event, we mostly disregarded the panic and took none of those precautions. It seemed as if there were two extremes: those who went out of their way to prepare for catastrophe, however illogical the measures were, and then there were those who barely even acknowledged that a new century was approaching.
Obviously, nothing happened at the turn of the century. Perhaps it was due to the obsessive checking of companies, spurred by the panic. It is likely that nothing major would have happened at all; perhaps a few glitches at most. Ludicrous Y2K fears and speculations, such as planes falling out of the sky, never came to fruition. The only true effect the Y2K rumor and ensuing panic had on the new century was to spur a technological bubble that grew momentously for the first few years of the century and continues to grow today.
References:
http://en.allexperts.com/e/y/ye/year_2000_problem.htm
http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110003022
Karen, Kason, Man, Winnie: Week5 "Top News of this week"
Top News – A discussion about freedom of speech in China towards the imprisonments of Mr. Tan Zuoren and Mr. Liu Xiaobo
We would like to discuss about the imprisonment of two human rights activists, Liu Xiaobo and Tan Zuoren. Similarly, both of them have been arrested by the Chinese government with the same charge, “Inciting Subversion of State Power (煽動顛覆國家政權罪)”, as they have written some articles expressing their views towards China’s political and environmental issues.
For Liu Xiaobo, he has penned the article “Charter 08 (零八憲章)” in order to call for greater freedom of expression, human rights, and freedom of elections. What’s more? He has collected over 8,600 signatures to reflect the census and support of Chinese citizens. After the publication, he was formally arrested on June 23, 2009 and sentenced to eleven years imprisonment on December 25, 2009.
On the other hand, Tan Zuoren has written a proposal called the “5.12 Student Archive (5.12學生檔案)” after the Sichuan earthquake. He has gathered information from people who have lost their children in the quake to set up a victim database. Through the investigations, he has described the poor construction quality of Sichuan schools with the expression of Bean-Curd-Pulp (豆腐渣工程). So, it exacerbates the dead and injuries in the disaster. Afterwards, he was arrested in March 2009 and imprisoned for five years from the beginning of 2010.
These two incidents are the induction for what we are trying to discuss, i.e. the freedom of speech in China. The freedom of speech is one of the basic human rights. Supposedly, it should appear in a civilized society. China is booming economically and is becoming a powerful nation in these years. However, it seems that the human rights of citizens and the degree of democracy are highly lagged behind, comparing with western countries. The purpose Tan Zuoren’s and Liu Xiaobo’s writing is to provide a thorough reality for all citizens. They want to arouse the public attention by their advocacy so as to construct a more democratic society. They should have the right to do so.
Human rights refer to the freedom and basic rights of which all humans are entitled. The main idea of human rights emphasizes that every single human should have equal treatment, and strictly forbid the racial, sexual or religious discrimination. Besides, freedom of speech is one of the most concerned one among the rest of the human rights. It is the right and freedom for people to say what one pleases, and to listen to statements from others, and of course, without censorship and/or limitation.
As we all know, China has boomed ever since the late 1970s due to Deng Xiaoping carrying out his new capitalist-inclined system, which promotes the foreign trade and economic investment, typically the Open-Door-Policy. With the implementation of the Western system, China’s economics is boosting in these few decades and she is supposed to be more liberalized under the influence of the Western policies. However, as seen in the news nowadays, China has often been criticized for its lack of freedom by other nations, especially those so-called democratic countries, such as the United States. On many occasions, other countries have been boycotting and/or protesting against China because of the limitations. For example, during the 2008 Beijing Olympics, due to the restrictions on reporting, many foreign journalists were engrossed in violence caused by the local police, resulting in various disapprovals from foreign countries.
In February 2010, Liu Xiaobo was nominated with a Nobel Peace Prize by the US chapter of rights group International Pen, for co-authoring “Charter 08”. Yet, the Chinese government was completely against this nomination, stating that “it is totally wrong.” From this event, we can see that other groups and nations are ready to challenge China and its constraints on freedom of speech. This would cause endless instability among the countries.
In these few years, Chinese citizens have obviously become richer and are competent in sending their children to study overseas. The exposure of the Western cultures and knowledge make the Chinese youths to be more critical and open-minded. After coming back to their hometown, they will be more insightful towards the Chinese governance with limited human rights provided. Also, the advancement of technology and Internet usage allow Chinese people to access the western cultures. So, Chinese people, especially the younger generations, are no longer confined. They strike to demand for a higher level of democracy in China.
If the China Government has not yet planned to offer more human rights, e.g. freedom of speech, there maybe much more oppositions towards her that would affect her governing power. People hesitate to speak, keeping the opinions and voices behind their masks. That would hide the ongoing of the society.
To conclude, we should always look on the bright side. We realize that China tries to make efforts and show less restriction on human rights, as well as the freedom of speech to her citizens. For instance, she signed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (《公民權利和政治權利國際公約》) to reflect her willingness on improving human rights in response to worldwide criticisms. But the imprisonments of human rights activists reveal the Chinese government is still strictly controlling freedom of speech. Statements and opinions towards political contents will easily be regarded as sedition. We hope that the Chinese government can fully stand to the signed agreement, respecting and ensuring the freedom of speech in China.
References
South China Morning Post, February 3, 2010. “Beijing warns against Nobel for Liu”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concerns_and_controversies_over_the_2008_Summer_Olympicshttp://news.bbc.co.uk/chinese/trad/hi/newsid_7990000/newsid_7996300/7996316.stm
http://big5.xinhuanet.com/gate/big5/news.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/2004-03/15/content_1367387.htm
http://www.dwnews.com/big5/BackStage/2008-12/2008-12-09-12-53-49-0228.html
2/08/2010
Comparison of objectivity in American and Chinese press (by Cherry, Ivan and Ann)
Comparison of objectivity in American and Chinese press (by Cherry, Ivan and Ann)
Last week we learned the concept of objectivity, ideally a faith in ‘facts’, a distrust of ‘values’ and a commitment to their segregation. We understood it from four different aspects: fact accuracy, disinterestedness, practices and ritual. It is obvious that reporters are supposed to inform the public of what the real story is. However, when looking at the process of news making from the perspective of people within a news organization, I noticed that objectivity is never a goal that can be achieved but a myth constrained by all kinds of pressure within and without the news organization.
As is known to all, a fact about something can be naturally positive, neutral or negative. In this sense, every single piece of this kind of news can be described as objective if it is the true reflection of the fact itself. It is the selecting process which is done by professionals that defines what the final version of news basically looks like. If more positive ones are chosen, then the newspaper sends a positive message of the subject to the audience. If more negative ones are decided to be covered, then a bad impression will be left on the public.
When I recall news that was concerned with America in Chinese newspaper in the recent years, I find that most of them are neutral facts or positive ones. The overall image of America portrayed by the Chinese press is a prosperous, democratic and highly-developed country while the image of China presented by the American press is a typical socialist country which in their mind is always autocratic and undemocratic. As to the content of those news stories, China often chooses formal political and economic events to cover while the US prefers to cover those informal stories told by common people or anti-government organizations. Apparently they are both telling the truth, but when we take a look at their selection of news, an implicit preference reveals.
From my point of view, objectivity will be reduced whenever a kind of man-made selection process is involved. Finally, this consistent selection of most prominent media will set an overall image of a particular subject which of course has something that is hidden by the media and is at least unknown to the public for the time being. Preference of some kinds of news is very common in the coverage of political issues. Newspaper then is not only a story-teller but also a public defender. In China, relationship between the government, the party and the newspaper is always close. So it’s not strange at all to see that most coverage of America is positive or neutral if China is devoted to form a good relationship with the US in the economic, political or military field. In America, a kind of unfriendliness towards socialist countries defines China’s overall image in the public even though China has recently made great progress in the development of economy and so forth.
Ignorance is an art. Objectivity is never a goal that can be achieved but a myth constrained by too many factors. Reporters tell stories for some purposes or with some emotion, particularly in the political field. So if journalists do want to be more objective, they had better let computers to do random selections of what combination of facts is appropriate.
Last week we learned the concept of objectivity, ideally a faith in ‘facts’, a distrust of ‘values’ and a commitment to their segregation. We understood it from four different aspects: fact accuracy, disinterestedness, practices and ritual. It is obvious that reporters are supposed to inform the public of what the real story is. However, when looking at the process of news making from the perspective of people within a news organization, I noticed that objectivity is never a goal that can be achieved but a myth constrained by all kinds of pressure within and without the news organization.
As is known to all, a fact about something can be naturally positive, neutral or negative. In this sense, every single piece of this kind of news can be described as objective if it is the true reflection of the fact itself. It is the selecting process which is done by professionals that defines what the final version of news basically looks like. If more positive ones are chosen, then the newspaper sends a positive message of the subject to the audience. If more negative ones are decided to be covered, then a bad impression will be left on the public.
When I recall news that was concerned with America in Chinese newspaper in the recent years, I find that most of them are neutral facts or positive ones. The overall image of America portrayed by the Chinese press is a prosperous, democratic and highly-developed country while the image of China presented by the American press is a typical socialist country which in their mind is always autocratic and undemocratic. As to the content of those news stories, China often chooses formal political and economic events to cover while the US prefers to cover those informal stories told by common people or anti-government organizations. Apparently they are both telling the truth, but when we take a look at their selection of news, an implicit preference reveals.
From my point of view, objectivity will be reduced whenever a kind of man-made selection process is involved. Finally, this consistent selection of most prominent media will set an overall image of a particular subject which of course has something that is hidden by the media and is at least unknown to the public for the time being. Preference of some kinds of news is very common in the coverage of political issues. Newspaper then is not only a story-teller but also a public defender. In China, relationship between the government, the party and the newspaper is always close. So it’s not strange at all to see that most coverage of America is positive or neutral if China is devoted to form a good relationship with the US in the economic, political or military field. In America, a kind of unfriendliness towards socialist countries defines China’s overall image in the public even though China has recently made great progress in the development of economy and so forth.
Ignorance is an art. Objectivity is never a goal that can be achieved but a myth constrained by too many factors. Reporters tell stories for some purposes or with some emotion, particularly in the political field. So if journalists do want to be more objective, they had better let computers to do random selections of what combination of facts is appropriate.
How Does YouTube Change Journalism?
Ming Fearon & Jackie Wang
YouTube is a website that hosts videos that can be uploaded for free by any registered user and viewed by anyone. The site was created in February 2005 and was quickly purchased by Google Inc. in late 2006 due to its overwhelming popularity. Prior to this purchase, almost anything could be uploaded onto YouTube. Its popularity was due to the fact that it is a great and readily available media resource. People turned to YouTube to catch up on shows or news clips they could not find the time to watch on television.
However, since Google’s purchase of the company, many copyright laws now prohibit the sharing of some videos. Because of this, certain television shows, movies, and music videos are unavailable in their entirety or at all on YouTube. Despite these laws, YouTube continues to provide the general public access with valuable media resources. The internet itself has greatly affected journalism and the media because anyone with access to the internet can reach masses almost immediately with the right online resources. YouTube is one of these resources; an excellent example of this lies in the “Newsish” video we saw in class.
The creator of that video, Bri Holt, demonstrates the freedom internet videos can provide a person with. His website, newish.com, is simply a collection of all the YouTube videos he has created with his social commentary on politics, the media, and pop culture. Holt can express his opinions about pretty much anything he wants, and clearly exercises his right to freedom of speech through the dozens of videos he has uploaded onto YouTube. Unlike those who work on network television, Holt is able to say things that could be considered incendiary. Although his audience is not as wide as those of network television, YouTube allows people who are specifically interested in the topics he is dealing with to listen to his opinions. His target audience can reach him easily simply by typing a few key words into the YouTube (or even Google) search engine.
Holt is such a good example of an Internet journalist because he discusses subjects that he has clearly researched, and later fact checks himself and makes note of it at the bottom of the video if he later realizes he has made an error. If people find error with something he has done, they can comment on it. This allows for a user-operated system of checks and balances that is not available with television and print journalism (unless of course the newspaper is an online edition and it is possible to post a comment).
Although there are some copyright restrictions on intellectual property, intelligent opinions cannot be censored on YouTube. Holt can report on news events with integrity and honesty, which is sometimes lacking in the media. On the most basic level, YouTube changes journalism because anyone can accidentally witness a significant historical event, videotape it on a cell phone, and then upload it onto the internet for millions of people to see. With this ability, almost anyone can become a journalist (or, in that same vein, a celebrity) of some sort.
Week 4 - Janice, Karen, Vanessa & Yannie
How does YouTube change journalism?
Journalism, according to the Merriam-Webster online Dictionary, implies the collection and editing of news for presentation via the mass media, in which it is characterized by direct presentation of facts and description of events without attempts of interpretation for appealing to current public interest. Over the past decade, the definition of journalism has been modified. A new term, citizen journalism, has also been created due to the advent of internet together with the advanced technology. Anyone being literate and with the access to publish news or own opinions can then engage in citizen journalism. This is one of the most obvious differences compared with the traditional journalism as people do not necessarily be trained as journalists. The internet, a platform where people can have sharing through texts and photos, opened the field of citizen journalism. Yet, YouTube, the platform for individuals’ sharing which was founded in 2005, has furthered enlarged the scope of citizen journalism as videos even generate more influences and feedback than pure texts and photos.
As mentioned above, anyone who is literate and can access to the internet can engage in citizen journalism. This greatly solved the problems of temporal and spatial discrepancies which exist in the traditional world of journalism. As resources of news organizations or news agency are limited, reporters can hardly be sent to places all over the world to get the news at once. Hence, excluding the news itself, pictures of the news events we see from TV, newspapers or magazines may not be the immediate situations. On the other hand, passers-by who witness the incidents can immediately record the events simply with their mobile phones or digital cameras then upload them onto YouTube. Perhaps the witnesses are not professional journalists, but those videos uploaded onto the site can be served as news coverage which goes even earlier than official news reports on TV. Apart from better efficiency in recording news by citizen journalists, the unconstrained time and unlimited frequency for people to access to YouTube is another advantage of updating people about the latest world. In other words, when compared with other electronic media like TV and radio, YouTube, associated with the internet, speeds up the flow of information delivery.
In the past, journalism is a one-way reporting where audiences are only informed from the mass media like TV, radio, newspapers and magazines. However, YouTube offers a platform for audiences to give while they receive. News consumers now can be news providers. Any internet users can be a journalist sharing specific issues or current events on YouTube rather than just attaining news from traditional news media. YouTube users not only can upload videos onto the site, they can also leave comments and ratings towards some particular videos. Although it may create more disagreements within the community, this kind of interaction can make more people concern about the social affairs and look into the news. In other words, such kind of interactive journalism can provide multi-directional viewpoints for news issues, especially for those controversial ones such as the local current affair of the express rail. Therefore, YouTube not only functions as a communication platform, but also pushes journalism forward.
Meanwhile, YouTube enriches the variety of news stories. As mentioned earlier, associated with the internet, YouTube allows the appearance of citizen journalists. Many general citizens upload their personal experiences, opinions and do sharing on the site. News stories and other materials posted by the YouTube subscribers can be re-used by professional reporters. YouTube, therefore, serves as an alternative source of news to professional journalists. For instance, stories like “The Bus Uncle” (巴士阿叔) and “Airport Auntie” (機場阿嬸) were first reported by the general public and then on the newspapers and radio. Journalists no longer have to be the witnesses to get a piece of story on their own. They can attain different news story ideas from the internet as well as YouTube as the video clips can be downloaded and re-used.
In some countries, such as China and Iran, where the authorities heavily imposed censorship and prevent media from reporting the news which they are not favor in. Not only being excluded from the ‘reality’, citizens there have a low level of freedom of speech without freely express their feelings. Journalists from other countries would also find it difficult in getting news or ‘real’ news in those conservative countries. Fortunately, the internet and YouTube provide an interactive platform for individuals and organizations to report and attain news, as well as sharing comments. For instance, when the presidential re-election was held on 12 June last year, there were protests against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The government stopped foreign journalists from reporting the messy situation and protests in Iran. Yet, many articles, photos and videos were uploaded onto YouTube by some Iranians so that foreign news organizations and netizens could see a better picture of the real situations in Iran directly through YouTube.
In the dimension of professional journalism, credibility is highly recognized as the media, news organization and news agencies have to bear legal responsibility for all broadcasts and reports. Unfortunately, the credibility is questioned as anyone can upload and publish things they care about, individuals, organizations or authorities can even publish fake news and messages, photos or videos onto YouTube with or without purposes. Sometimes, the mainstream news providers have also been duped. For instance, a woman in Denmark uploaded a three minutes video clip onto YouTube in which she was holding a baby, named August, and saying he is a result of a fling with a foreign tourist. Speaking in English, the woman said she was “trying to find August’s father". The video received over 800,000 hits. Many people believed it was real, and expressed supportive voices for the single mother. Some newspapers and television around the world even reported this ‘news’. However, it was just a hoax created by the Danish government’s tourism agency, VisitDenmark, because of the Danish government's intention to draw attention of the globe. This kind of negative exploitation of people's concern about social affairs eventually resulted in heavy criticism. Some people even questioned if that unethical video was trying to promote one-night stand.
Because of the advanced technology, everyone can record what he or she heard and saw by different electronic equipments conveniently. Before the advent of YouTube, people who want to express themselves on the internet have to be at least literate and have a certain extent of communication ability. Nowadays, for those who want to talk to the world may only be required to have some technological equipments and access to YouTube. Unfortunately, this kind of convenience for sharing information provides the ground of privacy infringement. As YouTube subscribers are not necessarily well-trained journalists, they may produce and spread some improper information which is claimed as ‘news’ but may infringe others’ privacy. Celebrities’ daily lives and behaviors usually draw the general public’s attention. Whoever witnessed some celebrities participating in some private parties or dating with friends, they may just record the occasions and disclose those celebrities’ behaviors on YouTube. Such kind of privacy infringement is a lot more than simply sharing what the eyewitnesses observed.
To summarize, journalism has not been changed radically. Still, the scope for people taking part in it is broadened to a wider circumstance. Journalism is no longer a one-way delivery of information and ideas only carried out by professional reporters or licensed media. As YouTube opened a podium for individuals to express themselves, share experiences and discuss matters people care about without special or temporal discrepancies, audiences can be benefited from a dramatic increase of news variety and be inspired of endless interaction with other YouTube subscribers. Although internet censorship imposed by various governments is inevitable, YouTube offers at least an opportunity for people to be updated of the ‘real’ world, particularly for those who live under conservative governance.
Reference:
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/journalism
Journalism, according to the Merriam-Webster online Dictionary, implies the collection and editing of news for presentation via the mass media, in which it is characterized by direct presentation of facts and description of events without attempts of interpretation for appealing to current public interest. Over the past decade, the definition of journalism has been modified. A new term, citizen journalism, has also been created due to the advent of internet together with the advanced technology. Anyone being literate and with the access to publish news or own opinions can then engage in citizen journalism. This is one of the most obvious differences compared with the traditional journalism as people do not necessarily be trained as journalists. The internet, a platform where people can have sharing through texts and photos, opened the field of citizen journalism. Yet, YouTube, the platform for individuals’ sharing which was founded in 2005, has furthered enlarged the scope of citizen journalism as videos even generate more influences and feedback than pure texts and photos.
As mentioned above, anyone who is literate and can access to the internet can engage in citizen journalism. This greatly solved the problems of temporal and spatial discrepancies which exist in the traditional world of journalism. As resources of news organizations or news agency are limited, reporters can hardly be sent to places all over the world to get the news at once. Hence, excluding the news itself, pictures of the news events we see from TV, newspapers or magazines may not be the immediate situations. On the other hand, passers-by who witness the incidents can immediately record the events simply with their mobile phones or digital cameras then upload them onto YouTube. Perhaps the witnesses are not professional journalists, but those videos uploaded onto the site can be served as news coverage which goes even earlier than official news reports on TV. Apart from better efficiency in recording news by citizen journalists, the unconstrained time and unlimited frequency for people to access to YouTube is another advantage of updating people about the latest world. In other words, when compared with other electronic media like TV and radio, YouTube, associated with the internet, speeds up the flow of information delivery.
In the past, journalism is a one-way reporting where audiences are only informed from the mass media like TV, radio, newspapers and magazines. However, YouTube offers a platform for audiences to give while they receive. News consumers now can be news providers. Any internet users can be a journalist sharing specific issues or current events on YouTube rather than just attaining news from traditional news media. YouTube users not only can upload videos onto the site, they can also leave comments and ratings towards some particular videos. Although it may create more disagreements within the community, this kind of interaction can make more people concern about the social affairs and look into the news. In other words, such kind of interactive journalism can provide multi-directional viewpoints for news issues, especially for those controversial ones such as the local current affair of the express rail. Therefore, YouTube not only functions as a communication platform, but also pushes journalism forward.
Meanwhile, YouTube enriches the variety of news stories. As mentioned earlier, associated with the internet, YouTube allows the appearance of citizen journalists. Many general citizens upload their personal experiences, opinions and do sharing on the site. News stories and other materials posted by the YouTube subscribers can be re-used by professional reporters. YouTube, therefore, serves as an alternative source of news to professional journalists. For instance, stories like “The Bus Uncle” (巴士阿叔) and “Airport Auntie” (機場阿嬸) were first reported by the general public and then on the newspapers and radio. Journalists no longer have to be the witnesses to get a piece of story on their own. They can attain different news story ideas from the internet as well as YouTube as the video clips can be downloaded and re-used.
In some countries, such as China and Iran, where the authorities heavily imposed censorship and prevent media from reporting the news which they are not favor in. Not only being excluded from the ‘reality’, citizens there have a low level of freedom of speech without freely express their feelings. Journalists from other countries would also find it difficult in getting news or ‘real’ news in those conservative countries. Fortunately, the internet and YouTube provide an interactive platform for individuals and organizations to report and attain news, as well as sharing comments. For instance, when the presidential re-election was held on 12 June last year, there were protests against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The government stopped foreign journalists from reporting the messy situation and protests in Iran. Yet, many articles, photos and videos were uploaded onto YouTube by some Iranians so that foreign news organizations and netizens could see a better picture of the real situations in Iran directly through YouTube.
In the dimension of professional journalism, credibility is highly recognized as the media, news organization and news agencies have to bear legal responsibility for all broadcasts and reports. Unfortunately, the credibility is questioned as anyone can upload and publish things they care about, individuals, organizations or authorities can even publish fake news and messages, photos or videos onto YouTube with or without purposes. Sometimes, the mainstream news providers have also been duped. For instance, a woman in Denmark uploaded a three minutes video clip onto YouTube in which she was holding a baby, named August, and saying he is a result of a fling with a foreign tourist. Speaking in English, the woman said she was “trying to find August’s father". The video received over 800,000 hits. Many people believed it was real, and expressed supportive voices for the single mother. Some newspapers and television around the world even reported this ‘news’. However, it was just a hoax created by the Danish government’s tourism agency, VisitDenmark, because of the Danish government's intention to draw attention of the globe. This kind of negative exploitation of people's concern about social affairs eventually resulted in heavy criticism. Some people even questioned if that unethical video was trying to promote one-night stand.
Because of the advanced technology, everyone can record what he or she heard and saw by different electronic equipments conveniently. Before the advent of YouTube, people who want to express themselves on the internet have to be at least literate and have a certain extent of communication ability. Nowadays, for those who want to talk to the world may only be required to have some technological equipments and access to YouTube. Unfortunately, this kind of convenience for sharing information provides the ground of privacy infringement. As YouTube subscribers are not necessarily well-trained journalists, they may produce and spread some improper information which is claimed as ‘news’ but may infringe others’ privacy. Celebrities’ daily lives and behaviors usually draw the general public’s attention. Whoever witnessed some celebrities participating in some private parties or dating with friends, they may just record the occasions and disclose those celebrities’ behaviors on YouTube. Such kind of privacy infringement is a lot more than simply sharing what the eyewitnesses observed.
To summarize, journalism has not been changed radically. Still, the scope for people taking part in it is broadened to a wider circumstance. Journalism is no longer a one-way delivery of information and ideas only carried out by professional reporters or licensed media. As YouTube opened a podium for individuals to express themselves, share experiences and discuss matters people care about without special or temporal discrepancies, audiences can be benefited from a dramatic increase of news variety and be inspired of endless interaction with other YouTube subscribers. Although internet censorship imposed by various governments is inevitable, YouTube offers at least an opportunity for people to be updated of the ‘real’ world, particularly for those who live under conservative governance.
Reference:
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/journalism
Karen, Kason, Man, Winnie - Week 4: "YouTube "
How does YouTube change journalism?
Traditionally, the common channels that people acquire news are newspapers, television, and radio. However, with the fast growing evolution of intellectual technology, people started to obtain news and information and even share their daily experiences through the Internet. This has brought about the establishment of YouTube, which, to a large extent, positively influences the global journalism.
First of all, the rapid development of YouTube leads to a change of news reporting format. Nowadays, people are becoming more and more concern about interaction, which provides a chance for YouTube to be progressively famous in the past 5 years. In that condition, many traditional news media agencies make use of online movie clips to report news every day. For instance, TVB uploads hot news to its official website and added a 24-hour News Report. Also, Apple Daily established Apple Action News which summarizes a news article with a video. Apple Daily also created an account on YouTube and uploads those videos onto YouTube’s server daily. Apart from
YouTube reinforces the interaction between the journalists and the audiences. After watching the news video on YouTube, audiences can simply leave their comments about the video. It forms a direct discussion for journalists and various audiences. All the feedback can be instantly and directly gathered. Compared to traditional journalism, YouTube is a much more interactive medium for news reporting.
Meanwhile, everyone can be a journalist today. Generally, if there is something worth to be reported, media companies will send a crew to cover that event. Everyone, however, can be both a news reporter and cameraman, gathering first hand and immediate videos and uploading them onto YouTube at once. Moreover, YouTube held a campaign called “Project: Report”, which is a journalism contest for the public in early 2009. Afterwards, the Washington Times hired the finalist, who only has experience of being a freelance writer, to be its multimedia journalist. In this sense, YouTube has broken down the barriers of traditional journalism entrance.
Moreover, the videos on YouTube are current and are always up-to-date, since people are frequently uploading new videos. People could watch these videos anywhere, at anytime. Thus, people do not have to wait until the
The videos depict scenes that are often more in-depth and first-hand than traditional media, such as TV news and newspapers. For example, the recent collapse of the 55-years-old building near Hung Hom was videotaped by witnesses who were there at the time. The video captured the live scenes of the cloud of dust from the collapsing of the building and was then uploaded onto YouTube. In contrast, TV news only broadcasted scenes of the wreckage but not the process, since the reporters did not arrive on time to record the situation.
Besides, YouTube became a source of news for journalists and news agencies. The typical example is the incident of “The Bus Uncle”. Originally, this is a video recorded by a youngster. After posting the video onto YouTube, it aroused unpredictable buzzes among the public. Eventually, it became a highly newsworthy issue. Not only did the local media cover it intensively, international agencies like Channel News Asia, CNN, and The Wall Street Journal also covered the event. The example reflects how media agencies source their news from YouTube.
YouTube allows people to search and view specific events or videos. Simultaneously, people are welcome to capture and share movies or events onto YouTube. YouTube builds up a free platform, and provides us an independent and unique way to publish assorted videos, including different political views or news. Since a large number of videos and films are available for the public to watch, many different angles of news has become our sources, which help us understand the political news in a more comprehensive way.
Moreover, many local newspapers nowadays have their own stances when they are reporting news. The mass media may criticize the news with bias, and they frame the news in different angles, which influences the audiences to build up different perceptions. To understand the entire situation, it has become more popular for people to search and view videos on YouTube. As there are many different sources uploaded and shared, people can choose what they are interested in and make their own judgment.
Although it appears that YouTube has brought a lot of advantages to global journalism, some drawbacks have also been prompted. The first issue is the violation of copyright. Many people like to record TV news and upload the clips onto YouTube. Some people also re-upload the videos produced by other journalist parties. These actions totally infringe the copyright of the original producers. Yet, in order to protect the copyright of their own news, it is difficult for the producers to terminate these people.
In addition, the credibility of the videos is often questioned by the viewers. Is the situation in the video real or fake? Because the videos are uploaded by ordinary people, not professionals, the events recorded may or may not be true, since the uploaders may have edited the videos, or that the actors are feigning. Suddenly, because of YouTube, every single thing is considered as “news.” For example, a popular video of a Chinese woman crying and whining in the
To sum up, YouTube has created a drastic change in the journalism industry. More and more traditional print media are using YouTube and online video clips as a new platform for their news reporting in order to enhance interactivity. News and rumors spread in a very short period of time. A wide range of sources is a good way to help people comprehend different events. But it also reflects a hidden problem, which may bring too much bias for people to form their own opinions. As a result, people are recommended to be critical about news, and should not believe in only specific sources of videos and news. Thus, people should connect with different types of sources in order to understand all-round opinions and information. Nonetheless, there is no doubt that YouTube is one of the most important medium for the public nowadays.
Reference:
http://www.journalism.co.uk/10/articles/533388.php
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)