I got the chills this afternoon watching Iraq video produced by soldiers in Iraq and hosted by YouTube. Thanks to Mark Glaser for pointing this out.
After watching the videos from Iraq, Rich Skrenta’s post about
citizen journalism caught my eye:
The key to understanding what is working in "Citizen
Journalism" is that they're first-person accounts. Journalists are
professional observers and interpreters; they watch, and report back to the
wider audience. But just like stockbrokers and travel agents, the Internet is
again cutting out the intermediary.
… [professional journalism] costs a huge amount to bring to
market, and what the Internet enables is a an alternative product built for zero,
and providing a different value proposition. Citizen journalism is going to be
more Citizens and less Journalism.
Wait a sec. Those videos from Iraq are great. So were the
first-person accounts of the depressurized Alaska Airlines flight and the London
Underground bombings. But none of this is an “alternative product.”
Professional journalism strives to provide the full context of
a story. Citizen journalism -- at least first-person type that Rich describes –-
is different. It goes deep on one particular piece of the story.
Jeremy Hermanns' post about Alaska Airlines flight
536 is the best account of what happened on that airplane that you're going to find. But to hear the rest of the story -- what the NTSB had to say, what
Alaska Airlines had to say -- you have to read the Seattle PI.
First-person citizen journalism is not a replacement
for professional journalism, it’s a complement.
