The anonymity afforded by the Internet combined with Citizen Journalism can be a dangerous combination. How do we know the Citizen Journalists we read are not agenda-driven liars using anonymity to spread propaganda on the Internet?
Integrity and truth are the backbones of journalism. Indeed since those two virtues have been watered down the Media has been increasingly criticised. Now Citizen Journalism has been touted as the new heroic version of the mainstream media that is unplugged, unfiltered, and in your face. Despite all the praise for this new medium that extends past personal blogs and message boards skeptics are beginning to look at the negative effects of Citizen Journalism.
Problems with integrity surfacing in most cases as libel have put citizen journalism on the Internet under the microscope of scrutiny. Unlike in mainstream media, a Citizen Journalist is protected by anonymity and can cause significant damage under the guise of an Internet personality. Major media personalities are well known, and their personal ventures documented and put before the watchful eye of the public. For example, who does not know that Oliver North took the fall in the arms sales to the middle east? Even with a checkered past he can still be considered a credible military analyst, but if any viewer has questions to his credibility it is out there for all to see. However, on the Internet medium of Citizen Journalism any person with a less than credible past can falsely represent themselves as a credible source, even fake credentials to lend weight to their claim. The line between blogger and CJ is still fuzzy at best when it comes to accountability.
Libel is yet another problem Citizen Journalism websites have to keep a close watch on in light of this anonymous protection. Many websites can and have been held accountable for the defamation (libel) expressed on their websites in commentary. The actions of anonymous defamation stretch further than the protection of sources allows. Case after case of libel on the Internet has come before American courts, and many victims have been rewarded damages because of defamation of character.
Citizen Journalism is not only torn down by potential libel, but by political pundits who use the medium as a way to flavor the news. This is one example where one can hardly tell the difference between the MSM and CJ. The Op-Ed comes into play time and time again as a way to express an opinion backed up by facts. The problem with the CJ Op-Ed comes when facts are not only lied about but manipulated to give an opinion based on a false premise. This is a travesty of journalism and an insult to the readers who are interested in facts, not the revised version.
Legally the anonymity of a Citizen Journalist is protected as a source and based upon examples of anonymous pamphlets, letters, and newspapers of revolutionaries and political activists. However, one wonder's is this news? Historically speaking, anonymous writers have inspired political change and are considered heroes, but is that needed in a free and critically thinking society? Should Citizen Journalists be concerned that their brand has become tainted by the unsavory of society? Should Citizen Journalism be regulated by licensed journalists? More over should those licensed journalists be held accountable for allowing libel and shoddy journalism? That is a problem worth discussing.
