Internet journalism or Citizen Journalism is radically changing and challenging the boundaries of traditional journalism. Today, the internet is breaking the chokehold on public discussion and information that the traditional media holds.Glenn Reynolds, a University of Tennessee law professor who operates one of the leading blogs,Instapundit, writes, typically, in his new book, “An Army of Davids: How Markets and Technology Empower Ordinary People to Beat Big Media, Big Government and Other Goliaths writes "“Millions of Americans who were once in awe of the punditocracy now realize that anyone can do this stuff—and that many unknowns can do it better than the lords of the profession,”
In the New Yorker, a study by the Pew Internet & American Life Project, states that there are twelve million bloggers in the United States, and thirty-four per cent of them consider blogging to be a form of journalism. That would add up to more than four million newly minted journalists just among the ranks of American bloggers. If you add everyone abroad, and everyone who practices other forms of Web journalism, the profession must have increased in size a thousandfold over the last decade.
Therefore lies the important question. WHat makes Internet Journalism so appealing??Perhaps what has attracted so many people to engage in or be consumers of Internet Journalism is the fact that they perceive Internet Journalism or Citizen Journalism as news for the people by the people. Nicholas Lemann in his article to the New Yorker entitled "Amateur Hour" states that these bloggers, unrestricted by any obligations to any news organization brings a fuller, clearer and perhaps interesting view of the world as compared to the traditional news Organizations " while sparing us the pomposity and preening that journalists often display."
However, the greatest asset and attraction of Internet Journalism itself; the nature of the writers, proves to be the greatest cause of concern as well. No doubt, the fact that these "journalists" are not tied down by any obligations would empower the writers to offer unbiased, unique points of view, how do we know that they are accurate or even the truth?? While the traditional journalism are restricted in some sense due to certain limitations imposed by the so-called "watchdogs", one thing is for sure, there has to be a certain degree of accuracy. The issue critics of internet journalism have is similar to the distaste our lecturers have for WIkipedia. The principle of being open for editing by anyone makes both of them unauthorative and unreliable. ( According to wikipedia. How ironic LOL)
Ok in my personal point of view, Internet Journalism is a good thing. It provides us with more insights as compared to traditional journalism. However, we should know that there lies the possibility of inaccuracy and it is crucial for us as prosumers of information to evaluate what is being told to us. Which is a good thing is you ask me. Internet Journalism for the good or for worse has forced us to be take up a more active role in engaging with current happenings via critical thinking.