Find some examples of news stories where ‘citizen journalism’ has exposed or highlighted abuses of power. How do these pictures affect the story, if at all? Are these pictures objective? Can pictures ever be objective? Write a list of the arguments for and against.
Definitions:
An objective perspective is one that is not influenced by emotions, opinions, or personal feelings – it is a perspective based in fact, in things quantifiable and measurable.
A subjective perspective is one open to greater interpretation based on personal feeling, emotion, aesthetics.
Citizen journalism is on the increase and is openly encouraged by the likes of the BBC on their website. At the end of some of their reports they will seek eyewitness stories and images from the public with something like this:
Did you witness what happened in Times Square? If it is safe to do so let us know about your experiences. Email haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk with your stories. Please include a contact number if you are willing to speak to a BBC journalist. You can also contact us in the following ways: WhatsApp: +44 7525 900971 Send pictures/video to yourpics@bbc.co.uk Upload your pictures / video here Tweet: @BBC_HaveYourSay Send an SMS or MMS to 61124 or +44 7624 800 10 Or use the form below...
The BBC don’t use this technique for every story. My view is that they select an ‘eyewitness’ for stories that fit their agenda. I have not seen many occasions where they seek an eyewitness to cover issues such as social poverty or government foul play. In essence they are appropriating other peoples images to convey their version of the story.
Events at the recent protest in the US outside the Turkish Embassy was captured by Herbert Maddison and posted on Twitter. Images of protesters being kicked and man-handled by Turkish bodyguards. The story and image were published in NY Daily with the correct attribution to the image taker. Permission for this type of image is via a request via Twitter from the publisher to the Twitter user. It is unlikely that a photographer from a newspaper would be there as the US government position is currently pro Erdogan. Even if they did have a pro photographer there it adds more realism by using a ‘citizan’ image which is low quality and poorly composed.
The comment and image as published in NY Daily is below:
Kurdish student Ceren Borazan was among the protesters who got caught up in the tidal wave of chaos and brutality that some are laying at the feet of Turkish President Erdogan. (Herbert Maddison via Twitter)
The Sarin gas attack in Syria in April 2017 was blamed on President Assad and resulted in bombing of an airfield by USA. Some say the attack was a hoax by the rebels. The following image being provided as evidence and shows people with bare hands washing victims. Experts say that this would have killed them if they touched the Sarin chemical.
The source of the above image is unknown but it is widely published on Twitter and used by many independent news You Tube channels. My assumption is that this is ‘citizen journalism’ due to the fact that professional journalists are now rare in Syria and unlikely to be in the area at the time of this attack. The question is which side is the ‘citizen’ on. Were they part of a “hoax”? Or did they take it to prove it was a “hoax”? Hoax or not, no mainstream news channel covered this aspect of the story or even suggested there may be another side to the attack. Most mainstream news outlets in the West are pro-war.
Interestingly You Tube channels are calling themselves ‘independent’ because they offer up a different story to mainstream news outlets. But how independent are they? Most are funded by You Tube viewers and not by corporate entities but they still have an ideology and broadcast to that mantra. Ultimately I have found you have to watch both and then make your own mind up. Although you will never know which one is true. Certainly not in the short term…maybe in 50 years time you might.
I think there are more reasons to question images by citizens than professional journalists. Usually we know the journalist and which publication they work for. We will know their previous work and can judge them based on that record. We will know what side they are on if we are open minded as viewers.
Citizen journalists, however, are unknown to us apart from a social media profile, which in some cases may even be fake. The image may have been modified and the situation manipulated more so than an image by a professional photographer, who will have to abide by some publishing standards. Although these rules have been proven to be flouted by some in the past at least there are standards in place. This cannot be said for the social media world where control is harder to maintain.
Against
Why was it taken?
Does the image taker have a ‘side’?
Who have they sent it to?
What hashtag have they applied to the post?
For
Adds realism, in the moment?
A passer by is impartial?
Martyn Rainbird 