YouTube, Blogs, and Media (1)

Has mainstream media caught on to the effects of YouTube and other video sharing platforms on the way news stories develop? The answer is yes. The Los Angeles Times and other media outlets (blogs included) have written stories (or posts) discussing the effects of YouTube, blogs, and the emergence of so-called “citizen journalists.”

In a Los Angeles Times article written in December 2006 titled “YouTube Journalism," the author illustrates a changing form of the way receive and evaluate information:

‘“Welcome to the "YouTube effect." It is the phenomenon whereby video clips, often produced by individuals acting on their own, are rapidly disseminated worldwide on websites such as YouTube and Google Video. YouTube has 34 million monthly visitors, and 65,000 new videos are posted every day. Most are frivolous, produced by and for the teenagers who make up the majority of the site's visitors. But some are serious…Some videos reveal truths. Others spread propaganda and outright lies.”’

The observation that some videos actually reveal “truth” is the start of a trend that is changing the way journalists approach stories. Yes, a journalist might have a great clip for a story from YouTube. But the question remains: Is the story legitimate? Even though a video poster has uploaded his or her video for the world to see, the journalists still have to sift through the fact and fiction. They still have to make the phone calls and set up interviews to confirm information.

The author of the L.A. Times article also points out how the internet has made it possible for many people to evaluate, critique and confirm the information in a story:

“The good news is that the YouTube effect is already creating a strong demand for reliable guides — individuals, institutions and technologies — that we can trust to help us sort facts from lies online. The millions of bloggers who are constantly watching, fact-checking and exposing mistakes are a powerful example of "the wisdom of crowds" being assisted by a technology that is as open and omnipresent as we are."

The bloggers who “expose mistakes” and write about it are actually keeping the reporters honest. Granted, the blogs themselves should be checked for credibility before they are used to either back up a story or spark a new one. The Internet has changed the way we can comment on a news story. No longer are the “Letters to the Editor” limited to a hand-selected bunch. Any person can now comment and have a voice on what they hear or read in the news.

The website “Online Journalism News” suggests that blogs can provide a new outlet for professional journalists to express their thoughts as well:

“Then blogging went mainstream. Established print journalists from outlets such as MSNBC and Guardian Unlimited started to create their own weblogs to sit alongside news and features, blurring the distinction between journalism and blogging still further.”

In these blogs, the journalists could perhaps add some insight that was not printed in the original story. They could provide more opinion aspects to the story as opposed just straight reporting.

When discussing bloggers and video posting, a person must also bring into question the reason for a person to post a video. Are most people who participate doing this because they want to bring an issue into the mainstream, or are they simply posting a “cool video” that they want people to watch? Did they intend for it to become a story or could it be staged? The author of the L.A. Times article suggests, “YouTube is a mixed blessing…How do we know that what we see in a video clip posted by a "citizen journalist" is not a manipulated montage? How do we know, for example, that the YouTube video of terrorized American soldiers crying and praying while under fire was filmed in Iraq and not staged somewhere else to manipulate public opinion? The more than 86,000 people who viewed it in the first 10 days of its posting will never know.”

If the “citizen journalist” is truly trying to report something and a major network picks up the video and airs it, should that person in some way be compensated for his or her contribution to the story. As one writer from NewAssignmnet.net points out, the rise of the “citizen journalist” could benefit a professional in their reporting:

“But as we’ve already seen with photography, citizen journalists can produce compelling and immediate content that the professionals can’t always get…Nor would citizen produced videos mean a reporter is out of a job – if anything it would add to the pro-am style that rounds coverage out – giving the journalist more time to do ground level reporting.”

A citizen journalist and his or her video clips gives professional reporters more time to focus on gathering information for the story. They are not bogged down with having to film shots for the story. They can go deeper into the subject and then write based on the clips.