Softbank buys into “citizen journalism”

by Mathew on February 22, 2006 · Comments

My boss at globeandmail.com, Angus Frame, doesn’t like the term “citizen journalism.” He says – and I quote – that it’s “a crock.” But he doesn’t mean that the concept is a crock – I think he means that the term itself is a crock, in that it makes it sound like some kind of brigade of citizens with fedoras (with cards that say “Press” stuck in them) and notebooks, fanning out across the land looking to right wrongs and triumph over evil (to quote Sailor Moon). He prefers to call it “user-generated content,” and for him it covers everything from e-mailed cellphone shots to reports from crime scenes to shared bookmarks.

There have been a number of experiments with the concept of citizen journalism, including Bayosphere, a high-profile – but ultimately failed – attempt by online journalism pioneer Dan Gillmor to marshall the forces of interested Bay residents. Dan has written about why Bayosphere didn’t work, and one reason could be that it was too rigid and structured.

At the other end of the spectrum is OhMyNews, a “citizen media” experiment that began in South Korea. And now OhMyNews has gotten a huge vote of confidence from Softbank, the Japanese venture capital outfit, which has bought about 13 per cent of the equity in the venture for $11-million. OhMyNews said that it plans to use the money to start a Japanese site, which is the first step in an international expansion.

OhMyNews has been written about many times, including in Wired magazine and in Newsweek. The venture began six years ago, and by the time Wired wrote about it in 2003 there were 40 editors and the site published about 200 stories a day – most of which came from some of the service’s 26,000 registered citizen journalists. By the next year, when Newsweek wrote about it, the site had more than 750,000 unique visitors a day. By way of comparison, globeandmail.com – a leading Canadian news site that covers Canada and the world – gets about half that.

Amy Gahran of I Reporter and The Right Conversation has some more thoughts on the future of citizen journalism here.

Share:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Ma.gnolia
  • NewsVine
  • SphereIt
  • StumbleUpon
  • I prefer to call it "unpaid freelancing"
  • Hi, Mathew

    I've been fascinated by the emerging phenonmenon of citizen journalism for a while now. And yes, it's a clumsy, inadequate label for something that hasn't yet fully formed.

    I pondered exactly this point yesterday in "I, Reporter": "Citizen Journalism as Horseless Carriage"
    - http://snipurl.com/mvfh

    I do think, however, that "user-generated content" is too generic. The forces driving the growth of citizen journalism are more specific than simply the urge to publish. It's more about a desire and need for people to be more involved directly in creating news, rather than being relegated to a passive "news audience" role.

    But a name is a name is a name. Ultimately, it doesn't matter so much what you call it as what you do with it.

    As for "unpaid freelancing" (noted by Seth, above), Yes I can understand why some people view citizen journalists in that dismissive light. In particular, I know several professional journalists and editors who are positively incensed by the concept. It is disruptive, and even threatening to some people.

    I'd encourage everyone to realize that what we're currently calling "citizen journalism" is still emerging and developing. I think it's too early to say yet exactly what part of the media landscape it will occupy -- although I do think it will stick around.

    IMHO, of course

    - Amy Gahran
    RightConversation.com
    Contentious.com
    IReporter.org
  • Mathew
    Thanks, Amy. I totally agree. It will be interesting to see whether OhMyNews manages to be as successful outside of South Korea as it has been inside, and how other services such as Topix.net and Newsvine evolve as well.

    Thanks for the comment.

    Mathew
  • Hey, “unpaid freelancingâ€? works from either direction.

    Some people are overjoyed at the prospect of replacing professional journalism with unpaid freelancing.

    Some people are appalled at the prospect of replacing professional journalism with unpaid freelancing.

    But in either case, I think both are in agreement that the "citizens" do not get paid, and this is the key aspect (I'm not sure I should use the word "feature").

    Why is ohmynews the New New Thing? You can almost hear the salivations ("It looks like news, AND WE DON'T HAVE TO PAY THE WRITERS!")

    Quote the Wired article: "The pay ranges from nothing to about $16, depending on how a story is ranked by the editors -- "basic," "bonus" or "special." ... If an idea has legs, a citizen reporter will pick it up and report it on their own time and expense."

    [Translation: "They do the deveopment for nothing, we give them a few peanuts if it's extra-good"]

    Why should anybody be cheering the outsourcing of journalism? Doesn't it seem at least a little bit bothersome as to who is directly in line to benefit? (hint: not "the public" - rather, the media companies).
  • Mathew
    A fair point, Seth.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Older post:

Newer post: