It's not a war: traditional vs. new

VS.

by Brynne Tuggle

So, we’ve talked a lot about citizen journalism in the past few months, and what this kind of participation looks like in the world of news and information. And I must admit I’m a supporter of it. I think citizen journalism is a required part of the future of legacy media. But, as I’ve discussed in other posts, conversation is also required.

I am fully aware that legacy media organizations have a lasting place, and they’ve been the mainstay for so many years, it’s hard to imagine anything different. But I also firmly believe that new media practices such as citizen journalism can also find a lasting place. I recently read an article about this issue. The conversation was centered around a ruling by a New Jersey judge two weeks ago that could affect the way people view citizen journalists.

The case went like this. A blogger was being sued for defamation after citing anonymous sources when writing in a comment section of a website, in more of a letter to the editor style than like an actual story. She made disparaging accusations about a company without citing her sources. This was not for a clearly defined media outlet, but for a website that she herself started. So, the problems were that she didn’t take any notes from her interviews, never asked the company she was commenting about for its side of the story, and didn’t provide any details of the facts that she found.

She claimed she was protected from the lawsuit by New Jersey’s media shield law, which covers not only traditional journalists but also online reporters. The judge ruled that some of these legal protections for traditional media people don’t extend to all bloggers who claim to be journalists. He said, “Simply put, new media should not be confused with news media.”

Now, don’t get me wrong. This case, I understand. I’m glad the judge ruled in the way that he did. This blogger wasn’t adhering to certain standards that she should have. But it makes me sad, that one blogger could have the potential to mess it up for everyone else. This comes back to the whole need for conversation. We have to start talking about these things. I believe the judge was right in this case, but I also believe we can’t let these kind of rulings ruin any momentum for citizen journalism that is building as more and more people are encouraged to participate in the news process.

We can't have the belief that we are in a war here, and we're working against each other, traditional versus new media people. We need to work together as we continue into the future. It's when we harness the power of both traditional and new media that we will find an even more powerful future for journalism.