Posts filed under 'Citizen journalism'
Rating: 
What do they say it is?
“Friction.tv believes that disagreement - or friction - is a vital element for a healthy debate, to reach new insights and to find out what’s really going on in society. We need disagreement before we can start to find some answers… Friction.tv is unbiased, open and uncensored (except for explicit content)… empowers you to climb on the soapbox and voice your mind about any topic at any time. You can ignore mass media and bring out the issues that really matter… Friction.tv will provide an interesting and stimulating alternative to the sanitised, agenda driven mediocrity of the conventional mass media.”
What do I say it is?
A formulaic video publishing site that relies too much on the soapbox for its claims to be an alternative media platform. For example, it has sections for Politics, Education, Environment, Local Issues, Sport, Society, Entertainment, and sponsored channels. A quick comparison, some of the sections of Guardian.co.uk are News, Sport, Politics, Environment, Culture, etc… Some of Friction.tv’s main content providers are The Conservatives, Greenpeace, LBC Radio. The content is somewhere between Youtube and Current.tv, without ever quite feeling either spontaneous, timely, or usefully provocative.
What’s great about it?
The speed of the viewing interface, the breadth of voices, the open access for any editorial, and the narrow brief—issues that can be debated.
I’m pleased to be able to access , for example, the views of Ian Taylor MP, Chair of the Conservative Science & Technology Committee, “arguing why there should be a rationale debate over this country’s energy requirements” as much as to hear the views of the Washington DC students talking over the noise of the kitchen party about old white men in power.
And forgive me, but I do love the retro curved TV box to watch the video through. I also think the learnt navigation / interaction is great (once learnt), in that you need to roll over the video for the dynamic control box (pause, play, volume, FFWD etc) to pop up. It’s probably a good idea, too, to hide the controls and time counter in this way, particularly when you’ve clicked on a video from David Cameron asking “I think our relationship with America is vital. What do you think?” and the first minute is all about the situation in the Balkans. Who edited that one?
What could be better?
Which brings me onto… content. Of course Friction.tv is subject to the quality of the video and argument uploaded, and some of it… most of it… just isn’t worthy of debate. Some areas of the mass media are banal, celebrity, agenda-driven, dumbed-down versions of journalism. But that doesn’t mean I want an online video debate site to reproduce that same dilute and scattergun approach to content, particularly when that site is claiming to provide an alternative. A lot of the content is either advertising a belief or position, or simply soap-box raving, which does not engender debate. Friction, maybe, but there is a difference.
Take this ‘debate’ as an example. I chose this example for two key reasons. First, it was one of the advertised ‘hot topics’ on the homepage. Second, its headline ties in with what Friction.tv says about itself, providing alternatives to the ‘agenda-driven mediocrity of the conventional mass media’.
Under the title “Islamophobes: don’t believe the media” it is in fact a very softly spoken advertisement for the Edinburgh Central Mosque and activities they are running at the Edinburgh festival (I assume last August, 2007: the debate has been running for seven months, but is on the homepage as it is one of the ‘hot debates’ as it has gained the most comments, 799 when reviewing).
But a) it is not a debate, b) nothing in the video makes reference to why the mass media cannot be trusted, and puts forward no arguments, c) the comments are not a direct debating response, d) there is no response I can see from the makers of the video, and e) can a debate run for seven months? Not to mention f) what are the answers, what next, what happens now?
This seems a fairly typical example. The ratio of video responses for this story (1 out of 799) is also about standard. The people at OneWorld.tv tried this video dialogue back in 2001/2 but it failed. Maybe it was too early. Maybe Friction.tv is itself also a bit premature for video-to-video debate.
A couple of points on accessibility/usability:
- Every video does not have a transcript, which to meet good accessibility standards they should have. Of course this will be difficult, but it does mean Friction.tv is only for those who do not have a hearing disability
- The debates / comments publish last at the top; there is no right answer to this, but if you are trying to read the flow of a debate (rather than just a list of comments) then you need to constantly scroll up, down a little bit, back up, etc. The BBC publish comments from top to bottom. As do sites that encourage debate on their articles, such as OpenDemocracy.net. Another video site, current.tv, also do comments chronologically from top to bottom, so you can follow the debate (as an example view this debate)
- Are the Agree/Neutral/Disagree flags with the original video, or to the comment before, etc? What if the original video is not posing a particular question, or it is crowbarred to fit the format for the site?
- The ‘local issues’ tab also means happening locally, not necessarily local to you. Which needs sorting, as there is no way to sort what is local (i.e. within 50 miles or so) to me. So it immediately frustrates.
How is it going to make money?
The numbers game. The more views and comments, the more traffic, hence the benefit from remaining editorially removed from managing the hot topic choices, for example.
Also, Friction.tv has a number of channels (e.g. sponsored video feeds) from the likes of The Conservatives, Greenpeace, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, all organisations that want to create debate and will bring in traffic. These channels are actually one of the better things on the site, as they try (although do not always succeed) to frame the content within a for/against debate.
Should I pay it any attention?
Out of the corner of the eye, yes. Friction.tv is one of the easy to use video/TV sites vying for a position of notoriety and fame (and the advertising revenue) along with current.tv, youtube.com, green.tv etc, and could potentially to be the one to win the race. But with only two subscribers to its Youtube channel, it needs to rely less on the ideal of free speech to make its name and more on delivering some of those ‘answers’ that it talks about in its promotional blurb.
By Alex Lockwood
Share
Sphere: Related Content
April 9th, 2008
Rating:
By Nicolas Kayser-Bril
What do they say it is?
“Neaju is the Internet’s first true citizen journalism site. It was built to allow anyone to report news as it is happening, and to post it for everyone to read, bypassing the normal editorial process that typically distorts reporting and inserts opinions and spin.”
What do I say it is?
What used to be a smart way of making money using other people’s sweat. The terms and conditions clearly state that Neaju will monetize your content by any means necessary and you won’t get a dime for it.
Content-wise, the total lack of editing allows for anything to be published on the front page. Bar-room journalism has found its home. Conspiracy theorists, rejoice!
What’s great about it?
The whole concept is supposed to be mobile-based. Great! But when I tried to access the site from the WAP Proof emulator, an error message popped up.
What could be better?
The absence of any journalism notwithstanding, Neaju doesn’t allow for much editing, as even in-text linking is off-limits. Some features could be interesting, such as the ability to follow a theme or a writer, but the system is so closed it makes it useless. Why not allow RSS instead?
How is it going to make money?
AdSense everywhere! They seem to have an in-house salesperson, but who would dare leaving a brand in such an unsafe environment?
Should I pay it any attention?
No. The total lack of journalistic work is a clever way to reduce costs. But it certainly doesn’t create any value for readers, who would have to fact-check themselves. For writers, the incentive to publish on Neaju instead of blogging is thin, as they lose control over content and leave behind any advertising revenue.
Neaju’s model isn’t about value creation, but merely about shifting value from writers to the publisher.
Share
Sphere: Related Content
February 8th, 2008
Rating:
What do they say it is?
Gnooze describes itself as: “The day’s news, with funny voices, in about two minutes. Featuring Marta Costello, produced by Amazing Cosbars”
What do I say it is?
A daily news show with a difference.
Meet Marta Costello. She’s blonde, pretty and opinionated. She’s also strikingly intelligent, rip-roaringly funny and a measured professional. Her show tackles the big news stories of the past 24 hours. ‘Tackles’ being the best word there: Marta goes from a calm, factual narrative to shouting and screaming her opinions at the camera.
Most stories follow the format of roughly 10 seconds or so of news-y detail, and then satirical role play that often start with the phrase: “So Bush was all like, y’know, whatever…!”
What’s great about it?
It has two great attractions. One being the obvious appeal of the stunning Marta who, you’ll soon realise, has quite a following of entranced male fans. Two being the extraordinary way in which the news is portrayed. Marta piles fact after fact on the viewer, and then puts it in a language that can not only be understood by everyone, but also laughed at too. It’s infectious.
Adding to its greatness is Marta’s video blogs. In these, she defends her editorial decisions – if you can call them that – with surprising integrity. Her recent thoughts about comments made by Hillary Clinton were particularly interesting and blissfully well put.
What could be better?
I hope that as Gnooze blossoms it may make its way to its own fully-formed news site, or maybe even a television show. I can imagine people watching this. Think Newsround but for late teens and without all the horrible patronising.
If Marta can get some more presenters on board and produce regular coverage of the same quality, we could have a youth-media revolution on our hands.
How is it going to make money?
Adverts, adverts, adverts. Gnooze is screaming out to be picked up by a television network. Something like ‘MTV Gnooze’ has a certain inevitable ring to it. It certainly wouldn’t be out of place on a channel like E4 either. The program’s almost cult-like quality will stand it in good stead.
Should I pay it any attention?
Absolutely. Not only because it can only grow and grow, but also because it’s rather, well, fun. It’s a nice break to hear some brash, opinionated American sound off about huge global news stories. It becomes even more enjoyable when you realise that somehow, in amongst the arm-waving and the face-pulling, Gnooze provides some of the most truthful, to-the-point journalism I’ve seen for quite some time.
A triumph in every sense of the word.
by Dave Lee
Share
Sphere: Related Content
January 15th, 2008
Rating:
What do they say it is?
”Sweeble.com was born out of the bottom of a bottle of wine at the dog end of a bad day in the newsroom.
It was the end result of hundreds of people’s stories rejected because they didn’t quite fit editorial standards – because they were too small, too personal, too one-sided or a story we’d already done and didn’t fancy doing again.
The news we tell each other as individuals, the stories we want to share, are rarely the ones we see in our newspapers, or on our TVs or hear on our radios. It shouldn’t be like that on the web too. The web needs an open space for news where anyone can tell everyone what’s going on around them, in their own bit of the world.
[…] Sweeble is the future of news on the net. It’s a future that will be built by its users. You decide what is news, you rate the writers, you choose what stories you see when you log on. That first eureka moment of designing sweeble’s editor-free concept was the start, from that we’ve built this cleverer-than-it-looks platform to let you run the asylum. Enjoy.”
What do I say it is?
Sweeble is a UK based website, in which all content is generated by users. The main idea is to allow people to present their news stories in an editor free environment, without restraints on subject or approach. In fact, the goal is to provide a space for personal approaches to off-mainstream stories. It’s more of a personal/individual project rather than a corporate effort. Hard-core Citizen Journalism.
What’s great about it?
You can post a text, with or without pics, and/or video. The page structure is quite simple and they tell you all you need to know in their tips and FAQ’s, from how to post to a quick guide about how to write your story, which you don’t see often. This shows that who’s running the place knows the job and aspires to have quality content.
You can personalize your account, so you can have your preferred subjects on your Sweeble’s homepage, and the idea of an ad section is good to create a community, but that part doesn’t seem to have much activity yet. But what caught my eye was the stark simplicity of the website.
What could be better?
Video is a strong argument for Sweeble, but there are some limitations: you can upload it to Sweeble, but not place it from YouTube, for example. Since you have to upload it, your video must be up to 50mb, which may not suffice to hold a longer interview or a home edited report (not really a problem now, but as users get more evolved in their storytelling this may happen). One annoying thing is that you can’t send the stories to a friend by email, nor embed the videos someplace else, though I managed to get them with VodPod. This happens due to the simple programming of the website, which handles well most features, but needs to be reviewed to allow Sweeble to grow (it’s still beta, I know). Another feature that could come up in the future is (audio)slideshows, but this is just a suggestion.
The user homepage options also suffer from the simple programming: few choices and radio buttons won’t do in the future.
One thing that annoyed me is the amount of times they emphasize legal implications over content, and how systematically they shake off any sort of responsibility. I know they must protect the website from any sort of legal liability, but it sounds too defensive. One short, clear disclamer would do.
How is it going to make money?
Google AdSense is there, along with smaller ads, and more publicity may come if they target the right companies: audio and video gear retailers or companies, mobile phone manufacturers, all that work with the semi-pro fringe. The citizen journalist is an expanding market niche.
Should I pay it any attention?
For sure. Sweeble is a good model for citizen journalism, that needs more promoting and live outside their own website – this means that they must, for instance, find some sort of synergy with other independent news projects, and reach the public. And, why not, promote basic journalism courses among their users. The aim is free, personal, quality stories, and I believe that they can go further than their original inebriated born of frustration idea, and build a true citizen news website. It all depends on what sort of effort they are willing to apply to truly make a difference.
by Alexandre Gamela
Share
Sphere: Related Content
January 7th, 2008
Rating:
What do they say it is?
7iber is an independent web-based citizen-media news outlet from Jordan.”
What do I say it is?
7iber (‘ink’ in Arabic written on a Latin keyboard) are four freelancers that got together to publish English-language content about Jordan. The project relies also on community-generated content, but it feels more like open-minded journalism than “citizen-media”.
What’s great about it?
Just like iNorden, 7iber aims at much more than milking the 2.0 cow. The 7iber team believes in the transforming power of the web and hopes to harness its power to actually change the Jordanian society at large.
What could be better?
7iber wants us to believe it’s “people-powered”, even though it’s written in a language only a minority speaks on a medium only a minority has access to.
Less than a third of traffic actually comes from Jordan. The project represents more of a toy for the elite (and orientalist American kids) and won’t make a difference for the unconnected masses. But it’s worth trying.
How is it going to make money?
Web-based publishing remaining dirt-cheap, 7iber relies solely on the founders’ capital. It might look for advertising dollars but shows no hurry. The dryness of the revenue stream seems not to affect the project, which publishes non-stop since May. Passion is a handy substitute for money.
Should I pay it any attention?
Just wait for the headline ‘Jordan Censors Homegrown CitJ Website’ on your favorite journalism blog. To succeed, 7iber must grow loud enough to bother the local government. Otherwise, it will become a collaborative, loss-making Lonely Planet copycat.
(Btw, Mark Glaser interviewed 7iber’s founder at Mediashift.)
By Nicolas Kayser-Bril
Share
Sphere: Related Content
December 26th, 2007
Rating:
What do they say it is?
“Thisismereporting.com was set up to combat all of the one sided journalism we are currently exposed to. You never hear the real story from real people, you never hear about anything good, you never see reports about ordinary people and their day to day lives.So here it is, show us your world.”
What do I say it is?
A place for video footage that may be considered as newsworthy. Most cases, it’s just a collection of extreme situations that were caught on tape by common citizens.
What’s great about it?
Not much, they just follow an equation to which all videos must agree: videos and citizens plus event equals news. Not really, though. But the main idea is great, turning common citizens into ENGs (Electronic News Gatherers, aka video reporters).
What could be better?
The design could be a whole lot better and that camera on the logo is totally wrong, it should be a cell phone. There is no context for most of the videos. This isn’t journalism, it’s voyeurism. The videos can´t be easily embedded, so the website’s purpose stays within it’s bounds, and dies there. And so does the intention of reporting anything, because the drama is there, but not the plot, so they fail completely. Besides, citizen videos that are used in breaking news reports go all to the big media outlets, not here.
How is it going to make money?
Is it? Ok, they have some ads, and it doesn’t look like they’re spending a lot of money, but survival is going to be hard in my opinion, unless they change something. Or maybe they’re just hoping to be absorbed by a major news corp.
Should I pay it any attention?
Yes, if you want to see some dramatic footage and be happy with just that.
by Alexandre Gamela
Share
Sphere: Related Content
December 19th, 2007
What do they say it is?
“FreshTies main aim is to encourage individuals, charities and businesses alike to actively participate in their local community. It gives individuals the chance to swap things, find local news and ways to help their community; buinesses the chance to promote their services, news to classifieds and initiatives;charities the chance to reach more people for support, resources and funds. It gives budding journalists/writers in need of experience, and those who would like a higher profile, the opportunity to write about their local community in various roles, as editor, reporter or features writer on local content, as well as content for a national audience.”
What do we say it is?
An interesting up and coming citizen journalism project set up by a former City lawyer, Ashish Poddar, that allows people to write about local issues and topics that interest them. From the information provided on the site it seems that individual writers will have a considerable amount of scope to develop their own stories and ideas and have a real choice in what they write about. An excellent way to gain experience and to participate in your local community at the same time. To access the FreshTies site fully you need to join as a member, which allows you to search for FreshTies members in your area. An individual membership costs £10.00 —- £5.00 of which goes to FreshTies and £5.00 going to a local fund to benefit your community.
What makes it great?
It is a well developed site and the developers obviously believe in what they are doing.
What mistakes are they making?
Although the website is well presented and easy to navigate, there needs to be a clearer explanation of what you can be expected to have access to when you join FreshTies as a member - it doesn’t really specify what is available to you at present which will potentially put some people off from joining.
How is it going to make money?
Freshties is a regulated, not-for-profit organisation, which makes money from its membership fees alone - they use all profits for causes in the community.However, because this is a slightly different take on many of the citizen journalism projects out there already, it provides an alternative for people who want to actively participate in journalistic pursuits. However, without any real advertising, word of mouth is the only way that the site is going to get further publicity. A lot will depend on whether current FreshTies members are happy with the services that they are receiving at present and if they are telling their friends about the site.
Should I pay any attention?
Yes. If you are interested about participating in writing about local community issues FreshTies offers the perfect opportunity to get involved and meet like minded people.
by Melissa Edwards
Share
Sphere: Related Content
December 13th, 2007
Rating:
What do they say it is?
“ScribbleSheet is about people expressing their opinions. It’s for people who have something to say but do not have the time to maintain a blog, or a job at their local newspaper. These opinions go unheard. ScribbleSheet wants to give everyday citizen journalism a home by making writing an article as simple as composing an email.
“ScribbleSheet gives readers the chance to discover alternative viewpoints and outlooks on the world. As well as the opportunity to join a community that makes the users, the editor by voting and commenting on articles. Key to everything is ScribbleSheet’s ethos which values openness, freedom, and mutual respect.”
What do I say it is?
The Scribblesheet is an opportunity for any person to write. It’s a place where we can find different perspectives about many subjects, different opinions and points of view.
Maybe we couldn’t find other place with people talking about different subjects from different places. It’s interesting because it’s a real way to take part in something.
In Scribblesheet any person can write, but first they must join the Web site. It´s very easy, it only takes a few minutes and the system is very friendly.
What’s great about it?
The content is created by the users. That is a prominent element, the people can write their opinions, with their different point of view. If the users are in the community they can add comments and vote. The web site has high usability.
What could be better?
In some articles there is too much text. The site doesn’t have bold, and posts are difficult to read. They should include bold and smaller paragraphs. Morover, it would be a great if any people could add comments, people outside the community.
The content is owned by or licensed to Scribblesheet, subject to copyright and other intellectual property rights.
How is it going to make money?
The site only has Google ads. It doesn’t have another kind of massive publicity. They have many comments, but it’s not clear how this will translate to revenue.
Should I pay it any attention?
Yes, if you are looking for other opinions from different people, with different points of view Scribblesheet is for you. Articles written by people of around the world, with varied context that converges in that web site.
by Darcy Vergara P.
Share
Sphere: Related Content
December 10th, 2007
Rating:
What do they say it is?
“iNorden.org is a joint Nordic citizen journalism initiative inviting bloggers, writers, aspiring and experienced journalists to contribute in the creation of a Nordic news portal.”
What do I say it is?
iNorden is yet another citJ experiment. The difference here is that it’s driven by a sort of pan-Scandinavian post-nationalism rather than profit.
What’s great about it?
Its wide network of semi-professional editors brings cohesion to the nascent community of contributors. A two-tier, pro-am-like structure like this allows for real brand image development while remaining very open to audience-generated content.
A fully grown website running on Wordpress also makes great economic sense (and, incidentally, exemplifies the uselessness of Instant Journalism).
What could be better?
Its much-advertised modesty is palpable in the web0.2 design. The site’s activity suffers, maybe as a result. iNorden ranks 2 millionth on Alexa. (That’s still significant, even when we take into account Alexa’s 110% error margin.)
It needs better positioning, moving further away from traditional, old-media brands to develop its own identity. Looking at the stories in English, it still seems iNorden follows the same leads. Competing with AP isn’t a good idea when you have no capital to start with.
How is it going to make money?
It’s not going to and it doesn’t want to. iNorden is non-profit and proud of it. That gives the brand a lot of credibility at a time where everyone tries to milk users for their content. User experience could very well be enhanced as a result.
Should I pay it any attention?
Yes, if you want to check on the web’s ability to deliver fresh ideas. With all its sincerity and, maybe, naiveté, iNorden’s getting the success it deserves would prove, once again, that the web has crushed the barriers of the offline world.
by Nicolas Kayser-Bril
Share
Sphere: Related Content
December 6th, 2007
Rating:
No image rotation. And that’s only one of the bugs.
- What do they say it is?“Instant Journalist gives you the power to easily create and manage an online community of citizen journalists. If you have the desire to give people in your community a voice, whether you are an individual or a large corporation, Instant Journalist will fit your needs.”
- What do I say it is?A kind of sub-wordpress CMS, proprietary and full of bugs. (I counted three error messages and a lot more minor bugs in five minutes). Now, they say their admin mode is great but the demo version doesnt allow for us to test that.
- What ideas can I steal? Not much. Every article has to be located on a Google map, that’s really good. On the other hand, the way it’s done here really is just 30 lines of code and doesn’t have any options (multilocation, eg, or a special way of presenting events that are recurrently at the same place, like town hall meeting)
- What mistakes are they making?Now it looks just like any other 2.0ish project, it would need to look a whole lot more professional to be serious .Hiring a graphic designer would be a start, as well as setting up a quality control process. They are dealing with some issues, such the lack of rich-text editing, and an update is expected by December.
- How is it going to make money?It’s not going to. Unless their admin mode is actually very easy to use, as they claim it is, and they market it very cleverly to community leaders with no sense of technology (there are a lot of those) and who have never heard of Ning (or disregard it as too trendy, not conservative enough).
- Should I pay it any attention? Yes. Cause if this succeeds despite its inherent flaws, it means that internet awareness in general is very low (for a start, it would mean that users can’t do a search. I’ve just checked Community Server, which apparently powers real communities such as MySpace Forums and costs roughly the same as Instant Journalism.)
Share
Sphere: Related Content
November 21st, 2007