Week4 Abstracts

Laura Wright

kgirl182@ufl.edu

Week 4 Abstract Package

“20 UNDER 40″

Reading PRESSTIME’s list of the top 20 under 40 opened up my eyes to how much more goes into the newspaper industry than just the jobs of reporter-editor. Going to journalism school, you’re trained to think in terms of graduating and then becoming a copy editor, assignment editor, reporter, or “online person.” The “20 Under 40″ show us that circulation, project management, advertising and marketing have had just as big an influence on journalism as we know it to be today. Recently, I’ve had a hard time thinking about journalism in terms of being a business like any other, but it really is. The ideas of customer satisfaction and catering to your audience all sound like mantras you would associate with the white-collar corporate world, or even the service industry, but they are just as important when it comes to the business of information. With that business, you need innovation, fresh-thinking, hard work and a willingness to adapt – all qualities that each of the 20 individuals on PRESSTIME’s Top 20 list seem to embody. The nominees come from a variety of backgrounds – from newspaper giants like The New York Times and USA Today to smaller papers and news outlets like The Tallahassee Democrat and The Norwich Bulletin.

The fact that no one on the Top 20 list is a print reporter demonstrates the industry’s evolution towards stressing new media, different ways of presenting information and providing neatly segmented bits of content for every sort of person on any kind of schedule. Every one of those on the Top 20 list is hard working and dedicated to the business of providing the highest quality of information, but what I see here as the overarching theme (which a majority of them mentioned) is the idea that you should always question the current system, always be willing to change based on what works and what doesn’t. The Top 20 all have something refreshing in common – they aren’t completely gloom-and-doom about the future and direction of the journalism industry. They don’t take the easiest approach of always yearning for “the good old days” of typewriters and stacks of notes. While they are realistic in recognizing the increased emphasis on raising profits, they’re excited and willing to take risks to keep the business Many reporters and editors, understandably so, are having a hard time making the transition from what’s always worked in the past (traditional print journalism that focuses on objectivity, the nitty gritty facts) to what may be ahead, which is a more three-dimensional way of thinking about providing information. Change is always scary, especially with industry like journalism with such a rich and steady history, but we have to learn to embrace it with excitement and a willingness to learn.

Al TOMPKINS’ CRIME STORY RESOURCES

The Poynter Institute’s Al Tompkins gives some unparalleled advice and tips for anyone who wants to go into crime reporting (or who inadvertently does when they find out that’s where most entry level newspaper reporters start out) and who wants to go beyond citing figures, statistics and all the other black-and-white minutiae that seems to be pervade crime stories. Statistics can be misleading. Sure, a 50% rise in the number of sexual assaults in Alachua County in a year may seem like a big deal, but when the number the year before was only 30, this increase isn’t really so newsworthy or indicative of any major shift or trend. We have so many commonly held beliefs when it comes to crimes (burglaries go up around the holidays, rapes are more common at night, etc.). While some of these are true, many are misconstrued. More hard-nosed, innovative crime reporting could help reverse this dangerous trend. Looking beyond the numbers and at the bigger picture is a major part of this, as Tompkins explains.

As for story ideas, Tompkins shares a wealth of them that go beyond the basic murder-arrest-imprisonment angle. The rise in juvenile crime is something that doesn’t receive much coverage, and there is some real opportunity here for examining the larger issues that play into it, like the school system and family life. The bad check story is something I never see covered and wouldn’t have thought of at all. A great story would be how retailers have taken stricter precautions to protect against bad checks, and like Tompkins said, spending a whole afternoon talking to store owners who have to deal with trying to get these “deadbeats” to pony up the cash. This story would be infinitely more interesting than a vanilla story on a local man being arrested for drug-dealing. A great investigative piece Tompkins mentions is examining the worst speedtraps in a city and tracking down what happens to the money obtained from the speeding tickets. Is it donated to some sort of charity for those hurt by a drunk or speeding driver? Does it eventually end up in the pockets of the legal system? The questions here are endless and would make for an interesting series of stories. As Tompkins suggests, far too many news outlets only report on a major prostitute sex sting. Rarely does a reporter examine if and how a city tries to prevent prostitution through drug rehabilitation and other forms of counseling. Much of our hesitancy to delve into these complex issues surrounding crime has to do with being taught to take the “Just the facts, ma’am” approach with newswriting. If we take a second to examine into the institutions and organizations around us, it might be construed as “taking sides” or being “too political.” This is the exact opposite of what should be happening in crime reporting, where there is probably the most potential to expose corruption, shed light on community problems and really change people’s lives for the better.

THAT FIRST INKLING: THE ORIGINS OF ENTERPRISE STORIES

I’ve always been curious as to how The New York Times always manages to have such a variety of extremely in-depth enterprise stories on every subject imaginable. The Times has pretty much set the standard for what it means to hatch a story idea and cover it from every possible angle with the precision and insight that make it the first name in award-winning print journalism. The results of Byron Calame’s survey to the reporters and editors of the Times provides us with a wealth of knowledge about what goes on behind the scenes of a prestigious paper. It’s telling that well over half of the initial ideas for the 23 articles came from the reporter him/herself, with none of the ideas coming from the “big 13″ editors named on the paper’s masthead. This is a testament to the fact that most managing/supervising editors should be the ones who help refine or tweak an original idea if needed. The reporter’s curiosity should the first step toward an enterprise package, and like Abramson says, should “bubble up” depending on what’s happening in the community or even on a national level.

The anecdote of Jeffrey Gettleman’s Page 1 article “In Iraqi Divide, Echoes of Bosnia for US Troops” is a great example of fresh-thinking in the drudgery of stories that come out of a long, drawn-out war, where you risk rehashing the same ideas in multiple stories. At least his editors were receptive to the idea of changing the original story to something that focused more on the former Bosnian peacekeeper and how his past was shaping the way he viewed the sectarian tensions in Iraq. Reporters should feel comfortable with coming to their editors with a re-tweaked version of a story if they feel that a different angle would be more appropriate or more interesting. Some reporters may feel afraid to approach an editor with a conflicting idea, especially when the story is the editor’s brainchild, but this shouldn’t be the case.

Often, as Calame’s piece demonstrates, the simplest of actions can result in the hatching of an insightful story idea. Roger Cohen’s trip to a tennis club led to a thoughtful, well-planned story that started with a specific anecdote about Italian architecture and ended up touching on the larger issue of how different countries view change. But, as Calame points out, much of a reporter’s story ideas come from following up on previous articles, even articles written by reporters from other news outlets. Many a time, I’ve read an article in the paper and had questions about it afterward that could have been covered in a follow-up story or simply a better, more comprehensive original story. Often, when interviewing a source for one story, he or she might key you in on a trend that’s more timely and leads to an entirely different story altogether. As Calame’s research shows, story generation can be the result of weeks of thought, simply a little bit of happenstance, or both. Either way, reporters must be innately curious about the world around them and develop a keen eye/ear for what would make for a groundbreaking enterprise piece.

TABOO TOPICS IN JOURNALISM TODAY

Accuracy in Media’s political leanings are obvious, but its mission statement is even more troublesome. It advocates accuracy and objectivity in the media but derides liberals in the process and is clearly partisan in its advice-giving. Despite what Cliff Kincaid and the rest of his team at AIM seem to believe, I really don’t see the supposed liberal bias in the media. In fact, I see a lack of an opinion all around. Of course, there are the cloudy areas like Fox News and CNN, which many call the conservative and liberal forces in cable news, but as far as daily papers go, most are rife with pro-con, let’s-be-politically-correct coverage.

Of course the taboo topics that Kincaid lists are hard to cover with objectivity. No one writing about them can say with absolute honesty that he or she has neutral feelings toward the issues of gun control, homosexuality, abortion and religion. There are exceptions to the rule, but it’s naïve to pretend that even while covering the news, we can totally and completely separate ourselves from the issues. Those writing about abortion shouldn’t have to cite the link between abortion and breast cancer as the sole focus of their stories, especially if the link is based on data that are statistically insignificant. We should always be careful in what angle we take, whether it’s “liberal” or “conservative.” Creationism articles are lacking in the news, but that’s because journalists are supposed to be the watchdogs of government, and we can surely agree that religion and the government should not co-exist. Whether AIM likes it or not, the separation of church and state prevents journalists from covering the theory of intelligent design with any depth or comprehension.

The “demonizing” approach that AIM claims liberal journalists take with the issue of DDT is troubling. While AIM proclaims that journalists are clearly biased and misinformed about issues like Islam, pornography, AIDS and homosexuality, it does not cite any evidence to support its opposing stance. “DDT has saved lives and can millions more,” Kincaid says. According to whom? What kind of survey or research can he actually cite? This isn’t to say that journalists shouldn’t be held to the same strict standard when taking the “liberal” approach to covering a particular social issue, but the statements made by AIM in this piece are rife with generalizations.

Maybe we shouldn’t be so afraid of a lack of objectivity in the news. With the rising competition between “just the facts” newspapers and the frank, editorial tone used on citizen journalism Web sites, maybe we should take a stance one way or another. Our readers might like it or they might flat out oppose it. But isn’t that what freedom of choice is about?

JANET COOKE’S “JIMMY’S WORLD”

CASE STUDY

This was an even more powerful example of how easy it is to fake a story, dupe your editors … and ruin your career. (Or get a sweet cut from a movie deal based on your screw-up.) Janet Cooke’s story was full of holes and inconsistencies. It’s a wonder it got past Ben Bradlee (although, apparently he was known for being a risk-taker and brazen as far as editors go). At the same time, however, I can understand the Post’s willingness to take the story as-is. As much as it was outlandish, it was provocative, and Cooke’s writing was captivating. It won the Pulitzer, the most prestigious award as far as the written word goes. The fact that all this happened under the watch of The Washington Post shows that it can happen anywhere. Even though it’s embarrassing and disturbing to see how a journalist could blatantly deceive readers, it’s definitely an important case study for future editors. “Jimmy’s World” undoubtedly raised the eyebrows of some editors at the Post (and hopefully not just the copy editors). If these skeptical editors had been more vocal about their concerns, this story wouldn’t have made it to print. We take most reporters at their word, but fact-checking is as important as ever, even when it has the potential to piss someone off. Since Cooke was a black woman working at a mostly white newspaper, maybe some were worried that their questioning her might have been misconstrued as prejudice. While Cooke’s legacy may be disastrous, her story is a thought-provoking lesson for anyone considering a job in journalism, especially editing.

STORY IDEA

With President Bush’s announcement of the economic stimulus plan, which includes sending out tax rebate checks to several million American families and individuals, I’d be curious to see what UF’s economics professors think about the ideas behind it and how the rebates may or may not affect students. The rebates will range anywhere from $600 to $1,200 depending on your filing status and how much you earned in 2007.

Will some students theoretically be eligible for the tax rebate? The rebates will most likely require an individual to have earned at least $3,000 in 2007, which is possible for those students who work 20-30 hours a week.

I would talk to a few working students to see how hopeful they are about receiving a check, what they would do with it (save vs. spend), etc. UF Professor Debbie Garvin, a CPA and tax expert, could give information on how this would most likely affect UF’s student population.

Another source would be UF Professor Jonathan Hamilton, chair of the Economics department. He would provide some tips on what young people should do with their tax rebates if they do end up getting one. He could also provide some insight into whether or not the rebates have the potential to reverse a recession.

15-20 inches with money-related graphic or a photo of a student working. Online story could have some sort of calculator where readers could enter their information and determine if and how much of a tax rebate they would receive. Another option for online could be a quiz to determine what you should do with the money based on your financial situation and spending habits.

Week 3 Abstracts

SKEPTICAL EDITING

There’s no doubt that this week’s theme revolves around just how common it is for fake or false information to be freely published without the slightest bit of hesitation. This either results in an embarrassed editor or, most often, an unemployed reporter with little chance of ever regaining any credibility in the industry.

Most — if not all – of the  latest newspaper reporting scandals that Reid MaCluggage hints at (Jason Blair, The New Republic, etc.) could have been prevented with more stringent, cynical editing.  Just as MaCluggage argues, the entire blame for fake or inaccurate stories can’t be placed on the reporter. The root of the problem is our tendency, by human nature, to believe everything we hear, read and see, especially if it’s seemingly sincere.

 

I think it’s crucial that MaCluggage doesn’t limit his editorial advice to just being skeptical about information in reporters’ articles. He also argues the necessity to question the implications made in these pieces. Just as many inaccuracies are made when a reporter takes a few accurate facts and figures from a rudimentary survey and makes sweeping and misleading conclusions based on them. This is how we get monthly stories about President Bush’s declining/increasing approval rate when closer examination of the margin of error of the data shows it’s more likely the president’s approval rate stayed relatively the same from month to month.

 

MaCluggage is dead on when he attributes the decline of skeptical editing to the fact that editors simply don’t have the time to read every story line by line and question the facts, figures and implications made in each. By the end of their shifts, most newsroom editors are merely reading over stories while looking for gaping news holes or glaring spelling and grammar mistakes.

MaCluggage’s idea about hiring one person whose full-time job would be devil’s advocate, who would look at every fact or assertion with healthy skepticism, is ingenious. This seemingly adversarial role of full-time skeptic would help reporters distance themselves emotionally from their stories and instead take a look at them pretending they are an incredulous reader who’s never heard anything on the topic before.

 

I believe that every story a reporter is assigned should be looked at as a perplexing mystery that requires lots of legwork and critical thinking to solve. Obviously, the who, what, why, where and how of a story are all equally important, but journalists should extend their investigation to “Is this true? Is this important? Is this misleading our readers?”

 

Obviously, MaCluggage’s push for skeptical editing requires a dramatic shift in reporter-editor relationships. It is true that too often reporters look at their editor as a good friend, a concerned equal with the shared goal of getting the story to print by deadline and without any glaring mistakes.  Maybe reporters should be more scared of their editors and what questions they raise about a given story. It may be a clichés, but it’s always better to err on the side of caution, especially when journalists are supposed to be America’s trusted truth-tellers.

JOINT OPERATING AGREEMENTS

At a time when revenue is in short supply and the newspaper industry isn’t particularly thriving, joint operating agreements seem like the best option for all involved: two separate daily newspapers with newsrooms in the same city combine their business operations while still remaining competitive – at  least in theory.  The idea is a more streamlined newsgathering process, less resources being expended and, most importantly, cost savings. Joint operating agreements allow the participating companies to operate with fewer employees; eliminate duplicate facilities, equipment, and functions; and save through bulk purchases of supplies and materials. What this means for us soon-to-be-journalism-graduates is that it’s very likely that newspapers will  be cutting costs at our expense, mainly in the way of layoffs and extremely low salaries (if they can possibly be reduced anymore, that is).

Another concern I have about JOAs is that costs are also cut at the expense of the quality and breadth of news coverage. If two news entities’ editorial departments are working together, you have to wonder if there’s any sort of diversity in the viewpoints presented in either paper. I don’t think sameness in news coverage is anything we should be striving for. Of course, many newspapers with JOAs maintain separate news and editorial departments and strictly combine their business and advertising offices. However, I wonder if this still risks reducing the amount of news stories to make way for more advertising, or worse, stories that are thinly veiled advertisements.

MEET THE NEW FACE OF HYPERLOCAL JOURNALISM

After spending years at newspaper giant The New York Times, I can understand why the switch to hyperlocal journalism was so tempting to Debbie Galant. Of course, like she explains in her online interview with USC Annenberg, hyperlocal blogs don’t really offer journalists a chance to do groundbreaking, national investigative pieces ala Watergate. However, they probably allow for much of the same hard-nosed exposes of local politics, which probably matter more to members of a small-town community in the long run than something on the national level. There seems to be a big disconnect these days with what’s going on in Washington and what residents of Smalltown, USA are talking about. Hyperlocal journalism also allows reporters to get much more reader feedback in a much more decentralized space. Forget to mention a controversial community event in that day’s blog post, and you’re likely to get dozens if not hundreds of comments. Despite criticism from many elitist journalists, readers of local blogs do expect much of the same professional polish and high-quality writing that they would expect from a big metropolitan daily. Galant’s readers, for example, have high standards for the writing on the Baristanet blog. Typos and grammatical errors are frowned upon, Galant explains in her interview. Galant’s Baristanet helps to discredit the criticism of hyperlocal blogging as being merely a space for amateur, community-newsletter- type writing. There has been quite an evolution in the direction and quality of these local blogs.

As a hopeful newspaper reporter, I admit that these hyperlocal blogs aren’t good for ‘my’ business. They have the real potential to draw much of the advertising dollars away from the newspaper industry, not to mention the potential to attract a huge base of loyal readers. This isn’t to say the newspaper industry hasn’t responded. Most if not every reporter is now being asked to maintain a specialized blog, a space where they are allowed to stray away from stuffy, hard-news writing and explore a more casual, editorial style with more chances for reader feedback and input. It will be interesting to see how major newspapers will have to continue to come up with new and innovative ways to compete with hyperlocal blogs like Baristanet.

 ‘POTEMKIN VILLAGE’ REDUX

 The Online Journalism Review’s Tom Grubisich provides a great (if not completely comprehensive list) of some of the Web’s most thriving grassroots news sites. With all the talk of how hyperlocal blogging is the newspaper industry’s greatest and newest competition, it’s nice to see some of the most concrete evidence of how an independent online alt-media is emerging. Brattleboro, Vermont’s IBrattleboro.com is, while mostly dominated by ads, a decent example of citizen journalism. It seems to provoke thoughtful discussion, mostly about politics. However, it also makes it easy for readers to submit useless or fake stories. The site’s stats page says that over 9,000 posts have been deleted as spam. Also, this doesn’t seem to be a blog where a lot of readers comment. Most of iBrattleboro’s posts only have a handful of comments. I do like the weekly polls section, however. It’s an interesting way to elicit feedback and make the site’s visitors feel more engaged.

Georgia’s BlufftonToday.com takes a different approach and merely links to local citizens’ blogs. It does seem a bit disjointed, with readers having to click in a variety of different places to find a particular story or read up on a certain topic. I think the site would benefit from a redesign, as it’s all over the place and not particularly user-friendly, which is something key for a Web site that’s supposed to promote citizen journalism. Comments are only allowed by registered users and aren’t allowed on print stories. This takes away much of the wiki journalism aspect that I think these grassroots sites should be embracing. However, I really like the fact that the site allows users to upload photos of community events or anything of interest to them. It’s a great way for locals to have a part in dictating what is newsworthy and/or interesting

Westport, Connecticut’s WestportNow.com is probably the best example of an ever-evolving and thriving citizen journalism. It has the best layout and design of all the sites Grubisich discusses. It has a good mix of image-driven stories and deeper, more text-based entries. The site is comprehensive in terms of what it covers but is also approachable and not overwhelming. I love the Year in Pictures section, which is a review of the past year through the eyes of dozens of WestportNow readers who contributed photos in 2007. This is a perfect example of taking the power out of the hands of industry and into the hands of concerned citizens with something to say.

 COMMON SENSE JOURNALISM

The University of South Carolina’s Doug Fisher gives a quick rundown of what kinds of things to think about when starting your own community journalism Web site.  He cites HartsvilleToday.com, a site created by a group of USC journalism students, as an example. It is a superb one. The design is user-friendly and the discussion posts are divided up into sizable topics like education, hobbies and government. It even provides users with helpful tips on writing posts and taking photos to submit to the site’s image galleries. The polls section and “Who’s Online?” feature are also extremely valuable.

Fisher brings up some important issues to consider when building that hyperlocal blog or Web site. The details really are important, and you have to consider what kind of niche you want the site to cater to – more personal commentary vs. the filing of traditional stories, social networking vs. reader feedback for your staff, etc. He makes a great point by explaining how linking to other Web sites can actually be a good thing. Being the entry point for access to other sites is better than having no one visit your site at all. Chances are, visitors might stick around for a bit and get hooked.

The best and most important bit of advice is to think like a user and not a bottom-line-focused publisher. To create a really useful participatory journalism site, you have to think about what kind of information is important to you, which stories really resonate. It’s impossible to cover all the bases of news (sports, breaking news, features, business profiles, etc.), so it’s good to have an idea of what kinds of stories are most timely. Just as Fisher explains, the great thing about a Web site is that it can be constantly changed and tweaked based on what users want.

It’s also crucial not to expect overnight success, at least without a good sum of capital to get the site up and keep it maintained on a regular basis. It also takes new and creative advertising strategies to help get the word out. I’m sure sites like WestportNow.com didn’t immediately take off. Citizen journalism requires an unique willingness to adapt to change, not to mention lots of hard work.

STORY IDEA – WEEK 3

As of February 19, 2009, all U.S. television broadcasts will be exclusively digital by order of the FCC. Also, as of March 1, 2007, all new television sets that can receive signals over-the-air, must include digital or HDTV tuners so they can receive digital broadcasts.

The analog switch-off ruling, which so far has met with little opposition from consumers or manufacturers, would render all non-digital televisions obsolete on the switch-off date, unless connected to an external off-the-air tuner, analog or digital cable, or a satellite system. An external converter box (an ATSC tuner) can be added to non-digital televisions to lengthen their useful lifespan. Several of these devices have already been shown, and while few are currently available, low-cost units are supposed to be available beginning this month.

Some existing analog equipment will be less functional with the use of a converter box. For example, television remote controls will no longer be effective at changing channels, because that function will instead be handled by the converter box. Similarly, video recorders for analog and tape-based VCRs will not be able to select channels, limiting their ability to automatically record programs via a timer or based on downloaded program information.

Although this switch is a year away, I’m curious to see who, if anyone, knows about it and what they’re planning to do, what they think, etc. I also wonder how this would affect UF students, who religiously watch certain TV shows every week and might have to purchase either a new TV or a converter box.

Obviously, I would first try to talk to someone with the FCC to find out more specifics about the switch-over, the equipment needed, and when it will be available. I’d also talk to Cox, Gainesville’s cable provider, to see when they’ll be selling the new converter boxes and what feedback they’ve received so far from customers. I’d also talk to some local electronics stores, like Best Buy and Circuit City, to see what they know about the switch. I would also try to gauge feedback from UF students, either by approaching them directly on campus or by going to one of Cox’s local offices, where many students go to pay their monthly bills.

The story doesn’t have too strong a time element, but I would want to run it within the next month. I imagine it would run at 15-20 inches with art of students watching TV and an info box with the basic what, where and how’s of the switch over. An online version could include a link to the FCC Web site that talks about the switch-over in detail. (http://www.dtv.gov/consumercorner.html)

 

 

 

Week 2 Abstracts

“Where Do Story Ideas Come From?”

 

Like Roy Peter Clark declared when he visited our campus last year, there are merely two types of journalists: those who come up with story ideas and those who don’t. This is a timely issue that I think has gotten lost in all the talk of “convergence” and “new media” we’re hearing as journalism undergoes its latest transformation. But it doesn’t do any good to have reporters who are expertly trained in thinking for online when they can’t generate fully developed stories of their own. Most importantly, you’re giving your editor more work to do when you rely on him or her to hand out every story assignment — never the wisest thing to do when you’re trying to earn points with your superior. Instead of just bemoaning this problem, however, The Simcoe Reformer’s Gregg McLachlan actually lists 50 places for writers to find inspiration for fresh and innovative stories.

I’ll be the first to admit that I’m guilty of waiting around for stories to come to me. This past fall, I interned for The Gainesville Sun, and although I came up with a few interesting stories of my own, I’d often revert to the role of what McLachlan terms “the perennial assignment receiver.” Most of it was laziness, and I knew I could be doing better. Here I was surrounded by desks filled with full-time staff writers, many of whom were excitedly pitching enterprise stories to their editors and bouncing ideas off of each other, while I was simply hoping my editor would go easy on me that week and send me off to cover an event story. McLachlan’s list of 50 places (of which there are tons more) is testament to the fact that all it takes is a little effort in order to get out of the slump of passive assignment-getter. Just being observant of what people are saying around you on a daily basis (a nice euphemism for eavesdropping) can be a great jumping off point for generating original story ideas. As journalists, our job is to always keep our eyes and ears open for what could possibly be a good story, and McLachlan shows that there are concrete ways to get out there and find one. But, as he stresses, it just takes some effort. It’s certainly isn’t accomplished by passively sitting at your desk. Going to vet offices, walking through downtown – all of that requires curiosity and a proactive work ethic that is hard to come by.

While McLachlan suggests several more unusual places that I wouldn’t have though of, he does leave out an important point. Besides making you a valuable commodity in the news business, being able to come up with your own stories almost always makes the writing process more enjoyable. With that enjoyment comes taking more pride in your work. You feel more connected to the stories that you’ve seen go from an idea to a total package. You take more care to see that it fairly, accurately and comprehensively tells a great story. I think journalists would enjoy their jobs a great deal more if they weren’t simply churning out stories crafted by other people and took an active role in what they write for their audiences.

“Revamping the Story Flow for Journalists”

The online world is quickly becoming that of “wikis,” which are bits of software that allow users to create, edit and link various web pages easily. The best way to think of a “wiki” is as a collaborative Web site. Not only does the original author get to edit his or her own content but so does the rest of the online community, who’s granted the option of adding bits of extra information and knowledge where appropriate. It only makes sense that this “wiki” theme is gradually infiltrating the world of journalism. It allows for real-time reader feedback, and, more importantly, provides an open environment for sharing information, which is what every journalist’s professional goal should be anyway. MediaShift’s Mark Glaser, in his Dec. 3 blog entry, “Revamping the Story Flow for Journalists,” shows us how the Internet gives us new and innovative ways of doing story generation, reporting and follow-up. The pre-Internet journalist’s workflow of sifting through paper records and relying on letters and phone calls to the editor for feedback has recently given way to a new workflow of looking primarily to the Internet for story idea generation, background information and reader feedback.

Glaser is right on target in predicting that as more and more people look at the Internet as a collaborative space, this idea of wiki journalism will change the way future reporters find, write and follow-up on their stories. An online story will no longer be a static space once it’s published. It can be edited, corrected and retooled to provide links to outside sources. I see this as only helping journalism become more accurate, open and interested in what readers want – and without as much of the newsroom bureaucracy that can bog down a thoughtful story.

Of course, drawing upon the equally loved and criticized use of Wikipedia as an example, it must be realized that not every wiki could produce quality journalism. The reliability of reader-generated information is probably the biggest roadblock to the spread of this kind of participatory journalism. After all, if you leave a wiki open to anyone, you’re bound to get some questionable edits. However, as long as access is restricted to registered users who are required to cite their sources for anything they add to the story, I don’t see why wiki journalism can’t help improve the breadth and quality of news. It could also be used to help streamline the news-gathering process. Wikis could serve as a great tool for compiling password-protected lists of helpful (and equally unhelpful) sources. Any reporter about to start on a story could look at his or her news organization’s wikis for feedback, advice and background information.