Is it simply the cost benefit to media producers that is making them take notice of citizen journalists? It would be cynical to suggest such a thing, but it's a suggestion not without some truth.
Local papers in America are beginning to encourage participatory journalism. One such paper is Bluffton Today which is one of the most successful local papers in the States. Their whole model is based on merging citizen journalist produced content alongside the content of staff writers. The daily publication was originally a freesheet but began charging 25c and 75c on Sundays.
The paper and website are being heralded as the new model for local papers, at least in America. This is just one example of where traditional journalism is merging with its citizen cousin.
The battle for papers to secure a proper revenue stream from their online content with The Times and Sunday Times planning to charge for access to their online content. The subcription method has been tried by The Irish Times tried the same thing in 2002.
The Irish Times switched back to providing free content again in 2008. Now, they charge for archived material. Anything a month old or more is only accessible after buying a subscription.
The uncertainty around the future of newspapers is largely due to the fact that a stable online business model cannot be found. The advertising revenue from online is too little to replace the print advertising. With print advertising dwindling, the pressure is on large news corporations to start making money from internet editions of their papers.
Geraldine Kennedy, editor of the Irish Times has said that all newspapers, not only hers, are very worried by the latest ABC statistics. Speaking at The Irish Times debate she said that online journalism posed a major hurdle for the Irish Times.
Press Ombudsman John Horgan talked about the legal difficulty of newspapers' online version vetting comments on articles. Addressing the DCU Journalism Society, he said he was aware that there are three full time journalists employed by the guardian to moderate reader comments. He also said that some comment threads just get too hot and are all wiped by the moderator. Talking about the legal repercussions, he said that comments must be very carefully moderated if they are to be included on newspaper websites.
Journalists are used because of their knowledge of media law and what constitutes defamation. This highlights another trend in that journalists are being asked to do something that isn't exactly the traditional definition of journalism.
The news that the BBC is telling its staff to embrace social networking sites in news gathering is the last sign that news sources are fundamentally changing. Peter Horrocks, director of Global news said: "If you don't like it, if you think that level of change or that different way of working isn't right for me, then go and do something else, because it's going to happen. You're not going to be able to stop it."
If the BBC are to use social networking to improve their news output they must not just throw caution to the wind, It must be embraced with a certain level of intelligence and sobriety, if not caution. The old journalistic values must still be held firm by newsrooms. Facts must still be checked and verified, sources must be reliable. Twitter and facebook are reliable, but they also pose dangers with regards to news gathering. It is incredibly easy for romours, hearsay and conjecture.
It is undeniable that social networking will become an invaluable news source for newsrooms the world over, but the profession must not throw caution to the wind when embracing this relatively new phenomenon.
