Post #3: "A New Communications Commons"

In Dorothy Kidd's article "Indymedia.org: A New Communications Commons", Kidd discusses how the way media is distributed and read by the masses has changed. Indymedia.org is a network of 60 autonomously operated websites involving independent media producers. This new social movement brings together all kinds of different viewpoints to create a bigger picture. Acting as a watchdog for the mainstream media, Indymedia.org represents a new generation of social movements.
A social movement is comprised of local housing and media activists, journalists, and independent media producers. The public has been in a struggle to take back the media from private control. The new commons of media is an open system of and by the people, or as a closed system controlled by private owners.
The birth of the Internet has created a new commons. During the 1990's, many people demanded that information be free and that media should not be siphoned solely through mainstream media. Nowadays, wireless technologies such as laptops and phones have enabled citizens to connect to each other through networks, creating "smart mobs".
The Internet truly has become an active way of challenging the norms of media. Indymedia.org is just an example of a social media site that keeps an eye on mainstream news media. An alternative news media sites called Democracy Now! offers stories on global war and peace issues without the constraints of mainstream new media. Smart-mobs are now capable of challenging and changing social norms by providing bottom-up global surveillance of both the government and the mainstream news media.
Personally, I think that the new communication commons is a beautiful thing. I can now communicate with someone halfway around the world about issues that we both feel passionate about. We would also be able to discuss how we could go about solving these issues without actually meeting face-to-face. I'm positive that communications commons will continue to evolve and challenge social norms as we know them.

Post #2: "Keeping a Close Watch"

In Kingsley Dennis' article "Keeping a Close Watch", Dennis thoroughly explains surveillance and sousveillance in today's society. While most of us are familiar with surveillance, he introduces the idea of sousveillance and how digital technology has changed the ways that civilians can keep an eye on their society, just as their government keeps an eye on them.. He states that "near constant surveillance of the person...has blurred boundaries between...outer and inner freedom" (347).

Nearly all technological devices have some sort of surveillance power. Whether it's a cell phone that takes pictures or an iPod that can take videos, citizens can now keep a better eye on police activity or even strike out against crimes that they see on the streets. Civil power was an essential part of the G-20 summit in Toronto, when civilians captured police brutality on film and brought certain police officers to justice for their wrongdoings. As Dennis explains, "surveillance is increasingly turning inwards...part of a growing trend of decentralized practices of individual and group monitoring through portable hand-held devices" (348).

All of this can be defined by the term 'sousveillance'. Sousveillance is "watchful vigilance from underneath" (349). Keeping with the theme of gatekeeping and participatory journalism, sousveillance is another example of how journalism is no longer in the hands of of professionals only. Citizens can now use hand-held devices like cell phones to record crimes or activities that were previously off-limits to report on. Sousveillance doesn't come without its consequences though. As Dennis states, "in the hands of responsible users such watchfulness can be kind, corrective, and protective. In the hands of the immature...it can be turned into harassment...and intrusion" (350).

Personally, I think that citizens having the power of watchfulness is a wonderful thing. No longer can citizens be at the mercy of police brutality or random acts of violence as long as a trusty cell phone is present. Although sousveillance may have an intrusive nature, the pros certainly outweigh the cons.

Post #1: "The Citizen Journalist as Gatekeeper"

In this article, Aaron Barlow discusses how the traditional role of gatekeeping in journalism has been redefined thanks to the Internet and new media. Gatekeeping used to be in the hands of professionals only, but because of blogging and social networking, everyday citizens are now able to express their feelings and opinions about the news. One one hand, citizens are no longer at the mercy of mainstream media and can now put their input on the internet for the world to see. On the other hand, just how reliable are "average" citizens? Furthermore, why should journalists be treated as respectable professionals if their jobs can be done by anyone?

Although mainstream news media websites (BBC, Toronto Star, etc.) allow comments, the commenting system is heavily monitored defeating the purpose of users expressing their feelings towards the news coverage. With blogging, users can post what news and opinions they wish without professional gatekeepers censoring their posts. Sites like Blogspot, Wordpress, and even Tumblr and Facebook have allowed citizens to assume the role of gatekeepers.

As Barlow discusses in his article, citizen gatekeeping also has its downfalls. "Screaming matches" can occur as everyone wants to have their voices heard. Since comments are not controlled as fiercely like on mainstream news media sites, this can result in arguments. This is a reason why some believe that gatekeeping should be left to professional journalists only.

I believe that gatekeeping should be a team effort between professionals and citizens. Citizen journalists should use the expertise of professionals as a guide to how they should conduct themselves. This gives citizens the power to say what they wish, but also while keeping an air of professionalism. Despite the line between professional journalists and citizen journalists blurring, I believe that professional journalists will still retain an important place in the world of news.