The recent suicide bombing at Moscow Domodedovo Airport have flooded headlines, TV news stations, social media sites, blogs and vlogs all around the world. This is not surprising – anything involving a potential terrorist attack and mass casualties will get people’s attention, boost ratings and spark discussions. The story is without a doubt newsworthy and of course tragic. I first saw the headline on Monday when it popped up on The Chicago Tribune’s homepage, I heard about it later on TV news stations, but it wasn’t until I stumbled upon some photographs and later a video on YouTube that this story really caught my full and undivided attention.
The photos were of the actual victims, bodies visible through a cloud of dust in the baggage claim. They were images comparable to the graphic ones from 9/11, but still an in-your-face photo that “Big Media,” as Dan Gillmore refers to it in his book “We the Media: Grassroots journalism by the people, for the people,” is often reluctant to expose to the public. The video was taken by a witness on the scene, essentially a victim of the bombing. He or she survived the attack, took out a camera or mobile phone and started recoding the aftermath.
On the same day of the attacks this video was posted on YouTube, and within 24 hours it had over half a million views. The video titled “First witness video moments after Moscow Domodedovo airport bombing,” was posted by Russia Today. According to their channel:
RT is a 24/7 English-language news channel. We are set to show you how any story can be another story altogether. Broadcasting over six continents and 100 countries, our coverage focuses on international headlines, giving an innovative angle set to challenge viewers worldwide.
The channel is government-funded but shapes its editorial policy free from political and commercial influence. Our dedicated team of news professionals unites young talent and household names in the world of broadcast journalism.
Despite their massive resources, large staff and extensive content, this video says more about the attacks than most stories will. Sure I skimmed through the news reports to get the details of the event, and listened to the news anchors for breaking details, but this video did something different. This video put me in that Russian airport, with the chaos and confusion of separating survivors from victims. At the end of the 44 second video all I could do was sit and absorb everything I had seen and heard.
This is the future of journalism Gillmor predict in his book – journalism driven by the people who are a part of it. I think this is great, because for the first time in a long time the world gets to see all of the news, any story they want and in any format. People are using technology not only to their advantage but to further the knowledge of others. At the same time, it also makes me hesitant. Hesitant, because if this is the future of journalism, if the maker of this clip can capture a story on film better than I could in words, where does that leave me?
For one, it reduces my $200,000 education to something I could have picked up off the street, but also makes me question where my future in journalism will lie. I have dabbled in being one of these grassroots journalists, but my initial failure and dislike left a stigma that plagues my desire to rely on the internet as a career.
During the fall semester of my sophomore year, a friend helped me get hired as an editorial intern for a website called Unigo.com. The mission of Unigo was simple, yet one I could easily be passionate about: Provide a place for perspective college students to learn about the schools they were considering from students who were currently attending them. My job included assignment every two weeks, e-mailed to me by my editor at the Ungio headquarters in New York City. The assignments ranged from political trends on campus, environmental initiatives to athletics. They were then posted on the Lehigh University section of the website, along with videos made by my friend, the media intern.
Something about the internship never sat well with me. I loved the opportunity to write more, and it was easy to write about events and people who were all around me, but the whole process seemed so impersonal. All of my interactions with my editor were via e-mail and I had little say in the editorial process besides the actually writing of the articles. These qualms turned out to be a moot point, because my internship was terminated by the end of the semester due to a lack of funding at the company.
Despite my brief exposure to the world of online journalism, I knew I didn’t like it. I missed being able to hold my completed story in my hand, and look over the shoulders of readers and see my name on the page. Also, if the website could not afford to keep on unpaid interns, what hope was there for their paid staff? When anyone can be a journalist, how valuable are professional ones, who maybe have better writing skills, but demand a paycheck in exchange for their work?
The world Gillmor describes in “We the Media,” ruled by bloggers and citizen journalist, is one I do not see myself part of, but instead as a reality I think I will have to come to terms with. Fortunately, the transition is still happening, and print publication still have a place in the lives of readers and lovers of paper like myself, while still allowing the hyper-accessible world of online media to fill the holes in the pages.
No comments:
Post a Comment