ePluribus Media Community || citizen journalism, for the people, by the people

Process and Message -- a Discussion

Fri Jul 13, 2007 at 04:31:59 AM EST

Aaron Barlow shares his talk from the Computers and Writing Symposium with us in his ePluribus Media Journal article The Medium is the Process; The Process is the Message. For a preview, read on:

The cost of publication is so low today that we can speak, publish, republish, revise... that we can keep our work in process for as long as we wish. And why not?

After all, we read differently today, too. We are comfortable with the idea that, one way or another, we can handle most anything we find on our screens. We can judge data and websites at the flick of an eye, picking up subliminal clues that tell us the level of expertise involved. We can tell at a glance what links to follow, whether we are being lured into a commercial morass or might be heading towards a new gem.

Our "neteracy" is much more than that, but it is also process... and in process of becoming and of being defined.

commentary :: :: :: buzz-it!

At their best, and as you know, Web pages are never static. Each one carries the past in its present manifestation--through links and older entries. Even that past is ever-changing. "Permalink" is something of a fiction, though they do say that nothing ever disappears completely on the Web--though the White House doesn't seem quite so sure (about its email messages, at least). Knowing how to deal effectively with pages that change is also part of "neteracy."

Along with carrying the past, most Web pages today invite the future--through comments and the page's inherent plasticity (in terms of inner workings), a plasticity that builds (and has built--and will build) the expectation of change into its very design. An understanding of the role of the comment (of the viewer/user) and the future possibilities of a page are also part of "neteracy."

On the Web, as anyone who has started a blog knows, it's hard to gain traction. What do you do, shout, "Hey, look at me! I'm here and I've got something to say"? No, you ease your way into the conversation--by listening to what other bloggers are saying, by reading, and even by researching. You lurk; you explore. What you learn through this is another aspect of "neteracy."

Writing for the Web can't simply be concentration on the screen as a replacement for the page. We don't dare judge the screen in the ways we've judged the static object that is the page. The dynamic of the Web comes from a give-and-take surrounding each work and drifting into the next, a continuing example of stimulus, response, and reinforcement.

More than most Web movements (though much of the Web does strive for openness), Citizen Journalism is deliberately open to examination of its own processes. Watching, one sees knowledge in development. On Citizen Journalism sites focusing on specific communities, one finds exploration and growth and not just things--especially now, when most such sites are still relatively young. In those Citizen Journalism sites not based on a locality, one sees calls for information, public dissection of "information" provided by government and scholars, and a scrambling to discover something at least approximating "truth." One finds, in other words, research in progress.

Read The Medium is the Process; The Process is the Message on the Journal and then come back here to discuss ...

If you like what ePMedia's been doing with research, reviews and interviews, please consider donating to help with our efforts.

Process and Message -- a Discussion | 6 comments (6 topical, 0 hidden)

the limits of "citizen journalism" (5.00 / 2) (#1)

Hi Aaron,

even though I often agree with you, I must disagree with your level of enthusiasm for the ability of "citizen journalism" to teach students how to be "neterate."

First, what might you define as "citizen journalism"? Would that be, say, establishing a profile on Digg and getting involved with that community by both digg'ing and commenting on stories. Or are you thinking of NowPublic's model? Or, still, are you thinking of independent "citizen journalism" a la Baristanet or some of the other projects out of NYU like I Want Media....

Further, by its own definition "citizen journalism" implies a certain level of objectivity--as in being removed from one's subject matter. If you desire to teach students how to interact with many of the 'netizens out there who have been socially active online since before the days of Berners-Lee...well, citizen journalism ain't gonna do it.

There's a lot more to 'neteracy than can be learned thru building a website, participating in a community, or writing content for any sort of web platform (website, blog, etc.) The web is not just about words--although learning to discern words is an important part of 'neteracy. Another important part is learning to discern imagery--how to tell a stock photo from a real photo or a massively photoshopped phony from the real thing (as in the Beruit smoke photos)....and more

Being neterate, then, is a complex process, involving social, verbal, and visual skills--and, as a teaching tool, citizen journalism isn't where it's at...

(BTW, thanks for the "hyperactive border collie" label. at least I now know what one of my online presences is like ;-) )

by tish grier on Fri Jul 13, 2007 at 11:49:43 AM EST

: I'm curious (5.00 / 2) (#6)

and I may not be interpreting you correctly but I can't imagine how citizen journalism, or let me qualify that as "online" citizen journalism does not involve "social, verbal, and visual skills."
Perhaps my experience with CJ is quite different from yours. Most, if not all of my frame of reference for citizen journalism has come from ePluribus. I can assure you working within our model allows for development of social, verbal, and visual skills just for starters. The opportunities within our organization may be greater as we have fewer people requiring most of us to wear different "hats" depending on the particular need at the time.
I hope you will be at the D.C. sessions for Media Giraffe so we can possibly continue this conversation in more depth.

by standingup on Fri Jul 13, 2007 at 04:28:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]
: Thanks, Tish! Good To Get Your Take! (5.00 / 2) (#7)

CJ isn't the only tool necessary for teaching neteracy, but it can certainly be useful.
One thing to remember is that today's youth are already almost neterate when then get to high school (let alone to college, where I teach them). They are conversant in quite a bit of the Web--utilization and construction. What they generally don't know is how to move beyond the social networking that is, of course, so important to them. CJ provides a way for expanding the Web universe they experience.
As to objectivity, well, I find it a red herring, at best. No one is objective. And I'm not sure it is even an appropriate goal.
If you look at early newspapers in the United States, there is even disdain for those who pretend to objectivity, seeing that as an essential dishonesty. There's a point there, though I must admit that the "myth" of objectivity has had a positive impact on journalism.

by Aaron Barlow on Fri Jul 13, 2007 at 06:55:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]
: Tish! (none / 0) (#3)

Quick question, completely off topic, but just wanting to know... are you going to Media Giraffe in DC? Will we have a chance to hook up with you there?

by Cho on Fri Jul 13, 2007 at 01:26:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The definition of Citizen Journalism (5.00 / 1) (#2)

is still a discussion in process -- or progress -- and is as fluid as the 'net itself. (Today) I tend to agree with Mark Glassner's definition ...

The idea behind citizen journalism is that people without professional journalism training can use the tools of modern technology and the global distribution of the Internet to create, augment or fact-check media on their own or in collaboration with others.

Citizen Journalism is just one tool in the toolbox of teaching or learning "neteracy." I look on the web as a place for continued learning and enlightenment. While it is also a place for disinformation and fraud, it is also a place where you can "fact-check" what you find or read ... also a part of becoming neterate.

BlogCritics offers this excellent advice ... Don't Believe Everything You Read On The Web, by Howard Dratch

The fact of the matter is that, in much the same way as those nice Nigerian bank people who are kind enough to offer you millions of dollars in a badly spelled email, you should think about what you received, who wrote it and why, who backs them and how to check their veracity. Go to primary sources of original materials from established sources.

by roxy317 on Fri Jul 13, 2007 at 01:20:31 PM EST

Tish's point about graphics and text (5.00 / 1) (#4)

or the visual interplay and how the brain cognitively processes both is quite important.

A subject near and dear to my own professional work, the US lags European countries in even beginning to approach "visual literacy."

It's sometimes stunning to me how little conscious attention we pay to those images that wreck so much influence on our unconscious thoughts, opinions and decision making.

Didn't mean to meander down this side thread, but ever since Edward Tufte wacked people into awareness of basic graphics for communications -- there has been more attention to the basics (and unfortunately, misapplication.)

by Cho on Fri Jul 13, 2007 at 01:37:07 PM EST

Process and Message -- a Discussion | 6 comments (6 topical, 0 hidden)

Support ePluribus Media -- Support Citizen Powered Journalism!