Citizenship Journalism - A world without mainstream media?

What would the world be like without the mainstream media outlets telling us what we should think, believe, or share with our family? What if all news and information was a conglomeration of "real people's" ideas, thoughts, and concerns. What if, considering the most recent financial mess, everyday citizens would have been allowed to voice their concerns much sooner, without all the political pressures and biases? What would that type of world be like?

Some journalism students seem to believe that perhaps citizenship journalism isn't quite right for mainstream consumption. According to a recent post on the allvoices blog, Kathy references another blog post in which journalism students have raised concerns about an allvoices format because, well you know, what if a terrorist writes an article?

The students apparently were "unsettled by the lack of ‘editors’. Questions included: what if someone posted something false? What if a PR person planted some fluff complimentary to their client? Do you perform any identity checks? And my particular favourite [sic]: What if the person writing was a terrorist?"

Now given the fact that these questions came from students whose main objective is to train to be professional journalists (would there be need for as many journalists with too much citizen journalism?) I take their concerns with a grain of salt.

The reality though is that citizenship journalism is as good as the community surrounding it. In that context, each and every one of us has not only the opportunity, but the responsibility, to flag inappropriate content, or to let someone know when an author appears to be submitting questionable articles.

As Kathy pointed out, however, we have the option of flagging articles we're not sure about, or to report something that appears hurtful, spiteful, or just completely false. We can also vote such articles "down", leave comments to express another opinion, or write our own opinion article (if the content is not hurtful or threatening).

There are enough writers and readers on the site now, that articles not following basic standards of conduct are not likely to stay at the top very long, and will mostly be ignored. After all, do these journalism students think citizens are stupid? Will you believe everything you see, hear and read just because its "in print" on the Internet?

To these students I can only say this - what makes YOU better at determining what is significant in my world, or the world of anyone who writes articles on this site, than we are? What makes you think that because you have a journalism degree, you can write a story that informs, or provides the necessary information in a way that deserves special status?

Not only do I question a journalist's ability to always provide all the facts (remember recently when Peggy Noonan and Mike Murphy were caught on tape giving their REAL feelings, nothing like what they actually reported on?), it also bothers me that big media outlets like Fox News and The New York Times, use their position as national icons of news and information to promote political, biased agendas. If there is to be outrage here, it should be within the ranks of journalism in regard to their own standards of conduct.

And what about all those misleading advertisements that newspaper and TV news sites are happy to take money on (this is only one example. Another I see often on news sites is the "Bush Passes Mortgage Bill Get your new loan today!")? When it comes to standards, as I've mentioned, it appears the journalism profession should look inside, before it begins to look out, for the problems.

I've taken similar stands against mainstream media before, and I've indicated that in today's society the media needs to begin thinking about these issues in ways that are different from the past. When "media was King", individuals had no choice but to follow them for information. Today, information is everywhere.

As always it must be left to the reader or viewer to determine what news is reliable and what news is just "another perspective". I am just glad that today we have far more resources to draw from than we once did, and considering the huge monopolies that have generated as a result of consolidating local newspapers and TV stations, I'm very glad we have alternative news sources like this one.

This site is everyone's opportunity; we have the opportunity to express ourselves unfettered from the political bias of the media, or anyone. We can share our outrage over the economy, or a political candidate, knowing that our voice will reach more people than it would if we stood on a tree stump in the middle of our yard.

To me, this is what allvoices is about, and why, if I were a journalism student, I would be proud to show any articles I'd written as part of this site on my resume. If, however, journalism students need someone to tell them how to think, or to correct their grammar (of course I could always go for some of that!), then maybe this site isn't quite right for them, and they should stick to OhmyNews, where, as the blogger happily points out, they "edit every single published story".