Citizen journalism can not take our jobs. Simple.

A survey of members of the public revealed some interesting points...most agreed that in a crisis, they would rise to the role of citizen journalist and capture the footage in whatever form. In regard to pay, opinions were mixed - some were decidedly against and others were adament that they should profit from the service they provide the press. What they did all agree on was that citizen journalism could never take over from qualified journalists because, in the words of one, "there is always a need for professional"....this is comforting news and it makes sense.
When people talk about how citizen journalism is taking over our jobs they are not really thinking straight. Imagine a world where there were no journalists, only citizen journalists; It just wouldnt work....to exist, citizen journalism in dependent on the structure provided by journalists.
If we look at it like this then, citizen journalism can only be an asset to the industry....a means of developing and enhancing a package/article that abides by the strict codes of conduct impressed upon journalists. It could never put a journalist out of a job because a journalist is needed to put their work in context. (one has to consider legal and ethical frameworks etc)
Where this becomes undermimed slightly of course is on the internet but I shall look at that in more depth later on before this blog becomes so long winded as to boor you senseless.
I shall leave you with this thought...as broadcast journalists would we not relish the opportunity to incorporate actual footage of the event we are covering as it happened if we were unable to get hold of it ourselves - be it audio, photos or video? I certainly wouldnt knock a gift horse in the mouth.....

Compare if you will examples of what I am trying to say....below are the ITV and BBC reports on the day of the London Bombings. BBC uses CJ within its piece. ITV does not. Which do you think is the better report?

SOPHIE