Journalists functioned as the authority of facts. Newspapers fit in the community; they were about “readers as citizens” David Nord says in his book Communities of Journalism. Civic journalism, at its core is about that community building exactly. Though people have classically argued that the job of journalism is to inform not engage in the community and politics.
“The essence of science, of public opinion, of democracy, of journalism was the authority of facts,” according to Delos Wilcox.
It’s inherently necessary for journalists-civic or otherwise- to be a part of the community. From this perspective they gain access, understanding and context for the stories they tell. Citizens depend on journalists to understand the communities on which the report. If they did not, we wouldn’t have war, court, city, tech, food, fashion and music reporters.
It’s also argued that civic journalism is “naively idealistic.” It does not take political and cultural difference and their powers seriously. So perhaps perfect civic journalism is an utopian dream, like Nord says. But, does social media get us a step closer to a goal?
The mental model of a community has changed drastically as the world has globalized. There are local communities, music communities, industry communities and millions of other communities. With the power of networks, groups can organize in a way they never could before. The power people in these networks have does help people get and stay engaged. Conversely, there is more power to consume information that validates our existing beliefs. It is certainly a double edged sword. That being said, the potential for civic, political and cultural engagement is significantly higher.
Nord also refers to the elements of modern journalism: objectivity, puzzling as it is, political and it existing with subtext.
This concept of subtext is important because it gets at the way. The way in which people consume the information relates to Marshall Mcluhan’s concept “medium is the message.” He emphasizes how much the character of the medium in which we consume influences how we consume it, processes it, understand it. This is all subtext.
This begins to explain why print news does not translate directly to digital (web, mobile, tablet, podcast). At SND Denver Richard Saul Wurman discussed how silly it is to have an animation of a page turning on an iPad. It’s not a book, it’s not supposed to be like a book and it doesn’t need page turning animation to feel like a book. We can think the same way about a newspaper online.
First news sites were direct replicas of newspaper pages. They were designed with 6 columns, huge headlines and flat graphics. It did not translate. The subtext of the web was ignored. But if we look at the Washington Post’s stunning investigative reporting project Top Secret America, we get the subtext and richness of what can be delivered on a browser, but not in print.
Nord also digs into what he calls the “orientation of text” and how the reader relates to the news service, the audience and the writer. When a reader writes a letter to the editor, they are speaking to the public, speaking to the editor and to the self.” This is no different than what we do on Facebook every day.
We are certainly expressing to our public and expressing ourselves. But I’ll argue that we also speak to the “editors” at Facebook. By using or ignoring features, we give them feedback about we use their product and how it fits into our lives, which is very close to what letters to editors did.
News is not much different now than it was before. The medium is different, the way it fits into our life is different but human needs for information and self expression are still relatively the same.
