Usually, a headline like this is about some rote attempt to reproduce the Korean model – or a Web 2.something-or-other utopian virtual adventure.

I have no idea where this will go and it’s not certain the folks at CNN know, either. But, it should be an interesting ride.

ireport.jpg

Since CNN embraced the citizen journalist movement in August 2006 with the launch of its iReport initiative, the news organization has received nearly 100,000 news-related photos and videos from viewers.

Yet fewer than 10% of those submissions have appeared on CNN.com or the cable channel.

That’s all about to change. CNN this week will enter YouTube territory with iReport.com, a new site built entirely on user-produced news. And unlike CNN’s own properties — where only iReport submissions that have been handpicked by editors and checked for accuracy ever make it online or on air — the new site will be wide open, allowing users to post whatever content they choose.

Bloggers, of course, will be watching. CNN hopes everyone else will be watching, too.




  1. moss says:

    btw – CNN paid $750K for the name of the site.

  2. GigG says:

    If there isn’t an editorial board of some sort it will be useless and might as well be YouTube.

    I used to be a reporter. Every story idea I had didn’t make the 5,6 and or 10 news.

  3. the answer says:

    Isn’t this commonplace in Canada? I remember a few people bringing their own cameras to places, and they would be the one holding the camera reporting on something. It’s been a while so I can’t remember.

  4. PJAM3 says:

    This is an interesting philosophy, but the reality is, it seems a lot of people are just providing content for free while the YouTubes(Google) and CNN’s of the world make more money.

    I’m sure a lot of these news stories will be good, but I’m also sure just like Youtube, most will be about somebody playing with their cat.

  5. OhForTheLoveOf says:

    #3 – If there isn’t an editorial board of some sort it will be useless and might as well be YouTube.

    So says you, a former reporter. And honestly, I do NOT entirely disagree.

    However, a substantial portion of the public, if not a majority, appear to have lost trust in mainstream news agencies and sources. (Thanks a lot Fox News)

    There are a few things humans are very, very bad at. Risk assessment is one. Compassion is another. And the one that matters here is, they are very bad at assessing credibility. Just look at Fox News…

    A certain cross section will take whatever weak-ass unprofessional crap gets thrown up there as gospel, so in fact, from certain points of view, its very useful. (insert mad cackling laughter here)

    .

    AND… Why shouldn’t they. Careful observers may note that the Democratic front runners were not elected by voters but selected by media. Long before Iowa, CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, Time, Newsweek, etc., so on and so forth, all pushed the most sensational personalities so hard and with such bias as to drown out any possibility of the other arguably more qualified candidates getting the exposure needed to make them viable.

    Further, while reporting on Iraq has turned more critical lately, for too long after 9/11 the press played softball with the Bush administration to such an extreme one might be lead to believe the mainstream media was simply a series of field offices for the White House.

    We need a few modern Edward R Murrows and News Agencies need to model themselves on the old standards set by the major networks and newspapers prior to the 80s. What we have now are all too often just mouthpieces for corporate interests and the government, simply reporting press releases and public statements without critical analysis.

    So really, how could user driven content be all be all bad, even without editorial oversight? Possibly, some citizen journalist out there might give us something that could turn the tide on the war against misinformation and propaganda. It would be nice to trust the news again.

    Even though Fox News is the most obvious and flagrant abuser of the public trust, they are surely not alone. Every mainstream outlet and many smaller sources are also culpable.

  6. TheGlobalWarmingNemesis says:

    #6 – “However, a substantial portion of the public, if not a majority, appear to have lost trust in mainstream news agencies and sources. (Thanks a lot Fox News)”

    You mean :Thanks a lot Dan Rather, et al”. Other than that, basically you’ve got it right. Even Cronkite admitted to “setting the agenda”. There should be no agenda – just the facts.

  7. OhForTheLoveOf says:

    #7 – No… I mean Fox.

    Dan is cool.

  8. TheGlobalWarmingNemesis says:

    #8 – Then you are OK with agendas.

  9. keane-o says:

    Just not yours. You can stick with Fox Snooze.

  10. OhForTheLoveOf says:

    #9 – If truth is an agenda, then yes I am.

  11. eyeofthetiger says:

    This reminds me of the shitts. At least the facial expressions would make a good travel guide.

  12. TheGlobalWarmingNemesis says:

    #11 – Not much truth coming out of Mr. Blather, at least where Republicans are concerned. He would and has tried anything to take one down, for whatever reason he could think of. Not impartial at all.

  13. god says:

    Poor widdle repugnicans. Evewyone picks on them. Could it be…because they deserve it?

  14. OhForTheLoveOf says:

    #13 – As opposed to Mr Rather’s completely detached, impartial, and objective critics?

  15. Mister Catshit says:

    While much has been made of Rather’s vanity, he used less hairspray in his entire career that does ONE Fox “personality” use in a week.

    Dan Rather is a great example of the extent the Right Wing Nut Evangelical Conservative Republican Radiohead Talkshow Freakasses will go to so we don’t hear about Bushys drug problems or AWOL issue. The story was true and accurate. Only the evidence presented was suspect BUT has yet to be disproved.

    ***

    If YouTube is any indication, I want an editor sifting the bullshit from the crap.

    I know that Bush isn’t the devil. So let’s not waste my time with some rant by an idiot with a distorted view and off his meds telling me something I know is bullshit. Just go to YouTube and call up “Bush is an idiot”. I got 1,740 hits. Yes maybe he is an idiot, but that isn’t news.

    Yes, yes, an editor might miss or downplay something relevant. Surely though, they will clean out the majority of the garbage.

  16. Rick Cain says:

    Stupid idea, citizens should avoid this concept. All it does is make CNN the information ‘gatekeeper’.
    The only real citzen journalism should be unfiltered and judged on its own merits. None of them need a corporate entity deciding what gets published and what doesn’t.

  17. J says:

    Yeah this won’t end badly!

    I remeber the day where people got paid well if that had footage of a breaking news event that no one else had. Now with the internet people are giving it away free.

  18. Mohammed Aslam Hussain says:

    How to become citizen journalist, please let me know the process by mailing me at mdaslamhussain@yahoo.com.

    Thanks,
    Aslam


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 11851 access attempts in the last 7 days.