Use Your Camcorder for "Citizen Journalism"

[Specialist]

Use your camera for "citizen TV journalism."

http://tinyurl.com/lf2of

Interesting concept.

Maybe we'll see more of this sweeping the country.

Also, here are the latest "State of the News Media" findings:

http://tinyurl.com/jt7pd

Jerry Jones
http://www.jonesgroup.net

[lordsmurf]

Journalism should be left to journalists. Of course, if that happened, a lot of tv people would lose their jobs, especially the cable channels.

People who try to do something professional without adequate training are called QUACKS.

A person with a camera is no more a journalist than a person with a needle is a doctor.

We already have a problem with "bloggers" who think they are journalists. Quite the contrary, they are hacks with a keyboard. Read http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/11/08/opinion/main654285.shtml

I like this line:

The public is now assaulted by news and pretend-news from many directions, thanks to the now infamous "information superhighway."

We need less wanna-be, half-assed, pretend-news and pseudo-news. Not more. Save the DV cameras for taping your kids learning to walk or playing in little league. A normal person playing journalist with a cameria is about on par with tying a bedsheet around your neck and running around the neighborhood pretending you are Superman.

If you want to be a journalist, go to school and get a degree in it, or a related field. Then go work for an organization, as a stringer or intern. Then pay your dues and work your way into a newsroom.

[edDV]

You can also create and air a program on your local community access channel. They will slot you between something like "Dolphins for Senate" and "Demand Solar Organic Asphalt Today".

[CrayonEater]

There is enough half-assed, phony "journalism" coming from the "mainstream" media. Anything that challenges Big Media's near monopoly is welcome. Of course, the reader/viewer hopefully has enough intelligence to realize what's real and what's phony, but, judging by the fact that TV news is still the most dominant format, that's probably not the case.

[lumis]

You can also create and air a program on your local community access channel. They will slot you between something like "Dolphins for Senate" and "Demand Solar Organic Asphalt Today".

It's about time, I'm tired of these war mongering republicans and cut'n'run democrats. It's time for a change.

[painkiller]

Just don't try taking pictures of the police in action.

They'll come after you, arrest you, throw you in jail, take your camera - and maybe let you go afterwards while not charging you with anything specific.

[lordsmurf]

Just don't try taking pictures of the police in action.
They'll come after you, arrest you, throw you in jail, take your camera - and maybe let you go afterwards while not charging you with anything specific.

Maybe in Putin's Russia, but not the USA.

[painkiller]

Sorry, Lordsmurf, but it does appear to be happening here in the USA.

http://instapundit.com/archives/031616.php

http://instapundit.com/archives/005992.php

http://instapundit.com/archives/002352.php

http://www.nbc10.com/news/9574663/detail.html

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/30/0557216&from=rss

http://www.splc.org/newsflash_archives.asp?id=469&year=2002

[lordsmurf]

In the end, those officers are going to be the only ones paying for committing a crime. You've also linked to the same story about 3-4 times. The hispanic guy with the cell phone, that one sounds like we're missing some information. The other two are clearly a case of police abusing power. It's been a few years since those stories, I wonder how they turned out. I would imagine cases were dropped and film returned. In at least one case, film was returned by the time of the article writing.

Again ... maybe in Putin's Russia, but not the USA.

[BJ_M]

painkiller is right -- it is even more widespread than what he just reported - and more and more areas are following suit ... not only police - but certain buildings and even landmarks ...


BUT - this is going to swing to political - so further discussion should be at politik.


I have to agree with CrayonEater, a LOT of so called main stream news is crap -- and very one sided ...

[SatStorm]

I'm able to tell that the younger generations in Europe don't watch the news any more from mainstream sources.

[Nelson37]

You do not need a degree or any training WHATSOEVER to take moving pictures of WHAT HAS HAPPENED. Modern journalism has become an excercise in explaining why it is that WHAT YOU SEE is not really that but WHAT THEY WANT YOU TO BELIEVE.

There are times when limited views of some action need some additional information to flesh out the story. The bias of the reporter or news agency should not be a part of the story, but mainstream media is so horribly biased by those who believe that they, and only they, have the proper "training" and knowledge to tell the story as to become worthless.

That is why major network viewership is down dramatically, people are disgusted with the flat-out lies, fake documents, and slanted stories. Just the facts, ma'am, just the facts.

[Noahtuck]

Just don't try taking pictures of the police in action.
They'll come after you, arrest you, throw you in jail, take your camera - and maybe let you go afterwards while not charging you with anything specific.

Maybe in Putin's Russia, but not the USA.

Wanna bet 8)

In the end, those officers are going to be the only ones paying for committing a crime.

True, but it still happens

A New Orleans story from not long ago comes to mind in case you missed it

People who try to do something professional without adequate training are called QUACKS.

Or reporters/journalists

[lordsmurf]

You do not need a degree or any training WHATSOEVER to take moving pictures of WHAT HAS HAPPENED. .......... but mainstream media

True, any idiot with a camera can record video.

But does it have style? Does it look good? Does it sound good? Is it edited down to just the most important information? The "just the facts, ma'am" part (which is a misquote of Dragnet, Sgt Friday NEVER said that exact line). Does the person know how to get all sides of the story, do they know how to get the real story (and not the PR line)? It almost never happens, without knowledge. Do they know to not use digital trickery or stage events?

Also know that style and technical correctness are NOT the same as editorializing or bias. I want to cut that thought off in advance.

I also don't believe in "mainstream media". That's nothing more than a meaningless buzz word, often used by people that hate anything that does not share their personal bias. There is no "mainstream media" out there. What does exist, is all sorts of news outlets. Some have skilled reporters, some do not.

Television is the sewer of news. They basically cut down a written story in a two-paragraph blurb that can be vomited from the mouth, by a talking head reading a teleprompter, in under 120 seconds. It's all about soundbites and B-roll, and the substance of the story is easily lost. It takes something like 60 Minutes, where just a couple stories are touched on during a full hour, to achieve what a written publication can do in a few pages. Our problem is we live in a boob-tube society, so we pick boob-tube (or just plain "boob") quality news.

Saying journalism is easy is like saying medicine is easy. Any quack can mix chemicals together and call it a drug. In fact, many do, and many die because of it. That sort of thing was outlawed forever ago in the USA, the cure-all tonic sellers.

[edDV]

If journalism was easy, you wouldn't see each of the major news networks capable of covering but one major story a day and then find that the story is a rehash of the 4am national newspapers.

This isn't journalism. It's only packaging the news (aka propaganda if delivered from an agenda). People are smarter than these people think.

Look for original analysis. Most isn't.