Commentary

Did Citizen Journalism Provide Answers In Mumbai -- Or Just More Questions?

by Wayne Friedman , Staff Writer, December 4, 2008

The rise of citizen journalism showed its true colors in the wake of the attacks in Mumbai. But was it every shade we wanted?

Because worldwide TV networks didn't have enough resources in that part of the world to act quickly, many looked to citizen journalists -- filing text and video reports on social networks -- for information.

Here's the weird part: Mumbai is called the financial and entertainment capital of India. Add in the fact that India has the second largest population in the world and growing. All that prompts the question: Where were the traditional TV news organizations?

CNN was the only network able to deliver relatively current on-the-scene reports -- only because a crew was there reporting on another story. Other news networks eventually got reporters/producers to the scene.

With traditional TV news organizations in a cutback mode, digital media analysts believe citizen journalism can take up the slack. But can ordinary folks truly offer up a balanced view of the world? Sure can. You just need to examine perhaps hundreds of blogs and other personal reports to get a complete picture. Do you have the time?

Many reports say citizen journalism actually saved the day in Mumbai, since little information came out of India during the initial hours of what turned out to the be three days of attacks -- the most intense being those on Thursday, Thanksgiving Day in the U.S.

But lots of this was misinformation. True news professionals work stories with perspective, previous intelligence, and, yes, time to examine the situation. Citizen journalism works best, perhaps, when unfiltered video is described as unfiltered content, targeting viewers who have a lot of time on their hands to look at a lot of content.

Interestingly. that's what we were left with on Thanksgiving Day on most of the U.S.-based TV news networks: lots of video with little context.

New satellite phone video technology, and other new gizmos, should -- in theory -- have helped flesh out the situation. Instead, critics maintain, a lot was missing, especially in the first hours of the attacks.

So while some technology makes the world seems a smaller and smaller place, when it comes to 21st century TV journalism, there are still lots of empty spaces. The result? More questions about world news than ever before

4 comments about "Did Citizen Journalism Provide Answers In Mumbai -- Or Just More Questions? ".

Check to receive email when comments are posted.

Pat Tucker from Muller Bressler Brown, December 4, 2008 at 10:03 a.m.
Unless I am mistaken, in the first 6 - 12 hours no one knew exactly what the situation was in Mumbai, including the authorities. So I fail to see what difference it makes whether professionals were on the scene or not. What seems to me more to the point is that the broadcast media try to air news even when they don't have meaningful or reliable information. They have people talking about things they know nothing about. This is no more informative than "lots of video with little context." At least we know the citizen video is a random sample and that we shouldn't expect much enlightenment.
Reply

Prashant Nayar, December 4, 2008 at 10:54 a.m.

The traditional broadcast networks caused more harm than good by giving away Commando operations and locations of people hiding in the hotels on Live TV. Traditional Journalism caused more problems than solutions in this case......Citizen Journalism would not have made things better either, esp. with Bombay not having anti-terrorist protocols in place.
My point is that one has to look at the context of the event. Citizen journalism is fine in case of natural disasters and other such calamities, not in the face of terrorist attacks!

Stuart Fischoff from Journal of Media Psychology, December 4, 2008 at 10:58 a.m.

CJ will simply have to evolve into a more professional cadre of reporters because it's clear that, regardless of how reasonably profitable news reporting is in various media platforms (print, blogs,electronic), the profit margins are never enough for Wall Street.

Because a nation needs the news covered and contextualized for it to stay informed and free, some schools, realizing which way the winds are blowing, are already offering courses to address the problems of professionalizing CJ and, for the near future, recommending, as a stop-gap incentive, using such experiences as calling cards into traditional journalistic institutions. Truly, what else are we to do when traditional journalism has been savagely "Tribunized," beyond trying to follow the successful St. Petersburg Times-Poynter Institute example of subsidized journalism? Yes, news is expensive, but then so is the loss of freedom.

Paula Lynn from Who Else Unlimited, December 4, 2008 at 4:48 p.m.

There is a difference between an amateur, a tourist and a professional. When you are sick, go to a trained physician, not to someone who read somethings on a website. Of course, help comes in many forms, but not all help is useful. Especially in dangerous operations as in Mumbai, amateurs can not only make errors and provide misleading or unofficial information, they can pose themselves and others in more harmful situations.