As technology evolves the definition of a reporter becomes blurry. No longer is news spread by "qualified" reporters, now citizens of a community can report on an event or issue. This can be seen in OhmyNews International. If a person who blogs about the event/issue can remain objective and have actual facts, even have one or two interviews, then I think that is still reporting, even if it is blogged about. In the case of Hunter, no one can tell the story better than the person who witnessed it. As the news of the accident was unfolding, sfgate and even Yahoo! local news reported on the tragic event with few facts and one to two interviews. In this case, as is in many cases, reporters and citizen journalists are ultimately trying to tell the story and inform the public. Maybe one thing that may trouble some "qualified" reporters now with the rise of different types of news media is the question of how secure their occupation will be in the years to come.
another thought in regards to what Lia said about being a reporter: would it be ethical to contact the family of the deceased, if they still don't know what happened, just for the sake of being one of the first to get a quote? when does being a journalist become a race for acclaim?
also, it would be interesting to follow up to see just how many "reporters" actually followed up with this story until it goes "cold"...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I agree that the story coming from an eye witness makes an even bigger story than stories that just simply report on the 5W's. Like you said, no one can tell the story better than the person who witnessed it. And with that said, bloggers like Hunter can qualify as a reporter.. he went out to the scene as soon as he finished his class and retrieved his camera. Reporters from newspapers and news stations go out to scenes like this all the time.. what would make the blogger who also went out to the scene any different from the reporters?? The only differences I see is that his report is published on a blog, and he wouldn't be paid for it.
I think you made a good comment on that and I also agree that times are changing and people need to get with the times..with technology these days, I can see how blogging could eventually top print news just because so many people are turning to the internet as their source for information...
You ask an excellent question: What if you contact a family member, etc., and the person doesn't know about the death. For me, it would depend on the circumstances. If I was certain that the death had occurred, then I might break the news. I'm pretty sure that during the last three months the Chron ran a 'missing girl' story in which it was noted that the reporter was the one who told the girl's dad that his daughter's body had been found. So many variables here: Are you sure? Have you talked with the person before, as in the case of the search for the missing girl. I think I would, but I never had to, and that means I don't know what I would have done. I'm guessing that many editors would want you, as a reporter, to do so. And if you were a TV reporter, the pressure would probably be even greater. To sum up: Someone will tell the person. Perhaps, you could break it better than an official source.
By the way: Good posts. Keep it up.
Post a Comment