Mar 29, 2010 - University of Toledo news
- What: 11th Annual First Amendment Freedom Forum
- When: Thursday, April 1, at 7 p.m.
- Where: The University of Toledo’s Law Center Auditorium
- Why: Discussion topic: "A Nation of Watchdogs: Citizen Journalists and Traditional Journalists"
"Cell phones, Twitter, Facebook and cheap video cameras have empowered ordinary people to serve as journalists, who record history as it occurs and then share it with the public," said Dr. Paulette D. Kilmer, UT professor of communication, who helped organize the event. "Citizens mean well, but they often lack training in journalism and do not check facts, worry about distortion, or dedicate their professional life to serving the public. Sometimes, these folks get the message right and offer invaluable eyewitness accounts, but as the lines blur between citizen and traditional journalism, the public is often challenged to determine whom to believe."
I would add that some so-called journalists exhibit a lack of training in journalism, but I guess that depends upon today's definition of "journalism." It's a living, evolving term.
"... the public is often challenged to determine whom to believe."
Yes, always assume the public is stupid.
More from the UT news story:
"The human inclination to seek ‘news’ to support personal opinions that bloggers also champion could result in a nation of misinformed people ill-prepared to participate in democracy. Democracy cannot exist without an informed citizenry," Kilmer said. "The press plays a watchdog role to prevent the government, big business or any other power broker from taking advantage of public resources or denying anyone constitutional rights."
A good book to read is: The Elements of Journalism: What Newspeople Should Know and The Public Should Expect (2001). I've not read the updated 2007 version.
Interesting. Wondering why would there be a known plagiarist on the panel?
Maybe that snafu will be part of the discussions.
If not it should be. If the question comes up, the audience members should be prepared with their shovels to handle the comments.
Oh...Troy Neff will be there? :-)
Couldn't they have found a champion of citizen journalism who's not on the payroll of the professional journalist on panel?
Or perhaps a retired journalist, anchorman (or person) , etc. There are a few still in the area.
Dave Murray, Managing editor of The Blade, Twitter feed - http://twitter.com/BladeManagingEd
Thursday evening tweets by Dave at the forum:
1. - I'm @ UT first amendment forum to talk about watchdog v. citizen journalism. Citizen journalism are all huddled together.
2. - Maggie Thurber looks espcially uncomfortable. Maybe the heat or maybe being on a panel w The Blade.
3. - Maggie left the forum saying she had a client that didn't wamt her to speak at the forum. Excuse didn't sound legit to me.
4. - UT forum was a great exchange of ideas about journalism, new and old alike. Maggie should have had the guts to stay.
So what is the result? Do we still have the right to free speech, or are they going to make us get free speech licenses?
So Maggie's integrity and voice only carry if it is in agreement with someone else who pays her. I wonder if she is capable of talking if her client takes a drink of water. I also wonder if she is capable of independent thought, after all their is littkle difference between getting someone not to talk and controling what someone says.
Are those legit tweets?
Why would she even show up if she was just going to announce she had a client that did not want her speaking there? And why would you not say that right of if that were the case?
Sounds extremely odd.
"Are those legit tweets?"
Yes. I attended the forum. Murray used his cell phone on stage before the discussion began. He said he was tweeting. He said he began using Twitter recently. During the "watchdog" journalism part of the forum discussion, Murray mentioned the Blade's coverage of Noe and the conduits.
I too found Maggie's excuse for not participating odd. Something about a conflict of interest with a client in Columbus. She announced this at the start of the forum, and then she left the building. I didn't realize the other chap on stage was from the Blade until everyone got introduced. And I didn't even think about the Noe/conduit angle until Murray mentioned it.
I was also there, and I thought Murray was rather tacky and unprofessional - so he represented the Blade well.
Money quote - He tried to say that the Blade isn't friends with any politicians... LOL
Maggie does have a consulting firm, so I don't see why the conflict of interest would be that unbelievable.
Murray thinks too highly of himself and the Blade. If you've ever heard Maggie fill in on WSPD (the only time I listen) or if you've read he rblog or debated her on any other blog including this one, then you know she isn't afraid of anyone else. I would have loved to see her battle it out with Murray.
To think she is scared is silly. The Blade might still be stuck in the past cause they have no future, as evidenced by the 100's of mentions of the word "Pulitzer" by Murray, but the Blade really isn't that scary any more.
It's losing big money, Murray even acknlowledged that last night.
And here's something to look for - unedited commenting on the Blade's stories - Murray is supposedly trying to get that through.
maggie posts here on toledo talk. it would be great to get her side of the story. I wonder if she'll post in this thread?