How do communities evaluate quality?
OK, so this question could mean a lot of things. Quality where exactly? In culture, online, but where? Seeing this weeks lecture in my university subject KCB201 (which is why I am writing this blog by the way, for those of you who didn't know...) was about Citizen Journalism, so one can only assume to base this question on the quality of citizen journalism, in particular what is being published online.
Citizen Journalism is the act of citizens (people in the community) playing an active role in the process of collecting, reporting, analysing, and disseminating news and information. In other words, they are publishing content, traditionally exclusively done by journalists, such as news and other information, themselves. Axel Bruns (2008, 69) has also identified that in all its forms, citizen journalism is driven by similar motivations as open source software, both acting as a "corrective and a supplement to the output of commercial, industrial journalism".
If you still don't get it, watch the video below. It gives viewers a rough idea, outlining what citizen journalism is. Videos just somehow always seem to explain it so much better than text...
A question of credibility and quality comes into consideration here, because citizen journalism, like the name suggests, is produced and published by the public. A short educative paper I found online sums this problem up quite nicely. "The quality of any citizen journalism project reflects the contributions of those who choose to participate, and such projects can be havens for triviality or unreliable content. At the same time, many users are inclined to trust material they find online, particularly if it is called “news.” In this way, citizen journalism projects have the potential to implicitly validate content that might be inaccurate, offensive, or otherwise lack credibility."
However, take for example Wikipedia. Its content is entirely produced by volunteers. That means, anyone with an account can add information on a topic of their choosing. But how do we know that this information is then correct, how do we know the content is false? A study of the quality of Wikipedia article's has in fact identified that Wikipedia articles are about as accurate as those found in the Encyclopedia Britannica (BBC News).
Citizen Journalism has both its positives and negatives. I feel it's really up to the consumer to decide if what they are seeing has quality and credibility. It really also depends on the point of view you are wanting to take if you think something is right or wrong. In my opinion, I like Wikipedia for a way to get started on finding more credible information. After all, the producers of the content would have also needed to get it somewhere. I suppose in this way it does have some credibility. Now all I need is for my lecturers to see that too and essays would be a breeze (I wish)...
Reference:
Bruns, A. (2008) News Blogs and Citizen Journalism: Perpetual Collaboration in Evaluating the News, in Bruns, A. Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond: From Production to Produsage, New York: Peter Lang, pp. 69-100. https://cmd.qut.edu.au/cmd//KCB201/KCB201_BK_163501.pdf (accessed May 8, 2008).
OK, so this question could mean a lot of things. Quality where exactly? In culture, online, but where? Seeing this weeks lecture in my university subject KCB201 (which is why I am writing this blog by the way, for those of you who didn't know...) was about Citizen Journalism, so one can only assume to base this question on the quality of citizen journalism, in particular what is being published online.
Citizen Journalism is the act of citizens (people in the community) playing an active role in the process of collecting, reporting, analysing, and disseminating news and information. In other words, they are publishing content, traditionally exclusively done by journalists, such as news and other information, themselves. Axel Bruns (2008, 69) has also identified that in all its forms, citizen journalism is driven by similar motivations as open source software, both acting as a "corrective and a supplement to the output of commercial, industrial journalism".
If you still don't get it, watch the video below. It gives viewers a rough idea, outlining what citizen journalism is. Videos just somehow always seem to explain it so much better than text...
A question of credibility and quality comes into consideration here, because citizen journalism, like the name suggests, is produced and published by the public. A short educative paper I found online sums this problem up quite nicely. "The quality of any citizen journalism project reflects the contributions of those who choose to participate, and such projects can be havens for triviality or unreliable content. At the same time, many users are inclined to trust material they find online, particularly if it is called “news.” In this way, citizen journalism projects have the potential to implicitly validate content that might be inaccurate, offensive, or otherwise lack credibility."
However, take for example Wikipedia. Its content is entirely produced by volunteers. That means, anyone with an account can add information on a topic of their choosing. But how do we know that this information is then correct, how do we know the content is false? A study of the quality of Wikipedia article's has in fact identified that Wikipedia articles are about as accurate as those found in the Encyclopedia Britannica (BBC News).
Citizen Journalism has both its positives and negatives. I feel it's really up to the consumer to decide if what they are seeing has quality and credibility. It really also depends on the point of view you are wanting to take if you think something is right or wrong. In my opinion, I like Wikipedia for a way to get started on finding more credible information. After all, the producers of the content would have also needed to get it somewhere. I suppose in this way it does have some credibility. Now all I need is for my lecturers to see that too and essays would be a breeze (I wish)...
Reference:
Bruns, A. (2008) News Blogs and Citizen Journalism: Perpetual Collaboration in Evaluating the News, in Bruns, A. Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond: From Production to Produsage, New York: Peter Lang, pp. 69-100. https://cmd.qut.edu.au/cmd//KCB201/KCB201_BK_163501.pdf (accessed May 8, 2008).
1 comment:
Katty,
Although you have identified what citizen journalism is, you have not answered the question you posed in your post title, "Citizen Journalism - a question of quality?" You have assumed that the weekly question was about citizen journalism, which is fair enough, however you have not related the 'question of quality' to the concept of citizen journalism.
I notice that you have written 'to be continued' at the end of your post, and I look forward to reading further, however I have a few criticisms and recommendations for your post.
In terms of citizen journalism, communities may evaluate the quality of the citizen journalism in a variety of ways. What individual members of a community personally consider quality is there opinion. However there are a couple of general checks to evaluate the quality of citizen journalism (and really, online content in general). For starters, the credibility of the author is definitely a main contributor to quality. Citizen journalists with archives of previous, fact-base journalism will most definitely be a credible source of information. Citizen journalism allows authors to voice their opinion much more freely than in mainstream media, however those articles with the most 'quality' will generally be those that are supported by factual information and credible sources. Check out online citizen journalism such as http://investigativeblog.net/, http://onlinejournalismblog.com/ and http://current.com/... these generally feature quality, reliable citizen journalists and information.
This also leads to considering the accuracy of the information, not only in terms of facts and sources, but also in grammar and spelling. Generally, frequent bloggers will produce higher quality journalism and writing as they have more experience in the field (Wilson 2008).
To answer the ‘question of quality’, perhaps apply the CARS checklist, looking at Credibility, Accuracy, Reasonableness and Support (see http://novella.mhhe.com/sites/0079876543/student_view0/research_center-999/research_papers30/conducting_web-based_research.html for more information).
For more info on citizen journalism (and my opinion on citizen journalism!!), check out my blog. I look forward to reading your 'to be continued....'
Reference:
Wilson, J. 2008, May 08. Week 10 Lecture: Citizen Journalism. Brisbane: QUT. [Lecture: KCB201].
NB: this may not be the correct name for the lecture… when I wrote this comment the slides had not yet been uploaded.
Post a Comment