It’s true that in recent months some examples may point towards the fact that user-generated content is paling against that of professionals. In the linked posting is a recap about some citizen ventures that failed recently, including the closing of Backfence. A few days ago, Steve Outing also came back on the lessons of his failed attempt to set up a grassroots journalism project.

Boriss concludes that there is no more hope “to integrate the benefits of new technologies, co-opt pesky bloggers, keep professional journalists in charge of our news, and keep “citizens” in their place as those who take direction from journalists.”

According to him, citizen journalism’s fundamental problem is that it takes a new media approach but adopts the old media model, “the same stale, one-size-fits-all, center-left, authoritative-tone news model that news consumers are rejecting.”

Citizen journalism also expects writers and amateurs to contribute labor for free, which Boriss doesn’t believe will work (although models are being worked out to compensate citizen journalists, and financial aspects have typically not been the concerns of those who work out of their own passion for a topic).

“The model that will work — that will make news better, not worse — is one that combines the talents of topic experts throughout the web with those who have a knack for aggregating and editing their material to satisfy an audience,” writes Boriss.

Seems this is already the model for traditional media? And can’t topic experts be citizen journalists, who – sometimes – have a lot more knowledge about a certain area than do general news journalists?

In any case, Boriss believes that citizen journalism is out the door.

This view is in total contradiction with a recent article by the Washington Post on citizen journalist Faye Anderson. And with the success of many other citizen journalism or pro-am ventures.

Source: Future of News through IFRA Executive News Service