What are the differences between gatekeeping and gatewatching?

Gatewatching is a term to describe the new form of news sharing in citizen journalism. It lies in contrast to gatekeeping, a commonly known term among professional journalists. The underlying theme of gatekeeping in journalism is a process of selection of what can be seen by an audience through the editing department of a news outlet (Hartley 2005, 94). Whereas with gatewatching, the only way of influencing ones opinions on a written piece is to comment on citizens blogs and websites. It does not restrict content, rather commenting allows for further socialising with people of similar interests, and well as building on research.

MySpace, up until now, is one website which could almost be described as a form of gatekeeping. This is a result of its closed network environment, where people could only interact with one another through the social website itself. Of course it is not really a journalistic approach, yet the same reasoning applies. Basically, the information written by users on the site could not be shared or added to any other website. However, MySpace is now interested in networking between websites and collaborating information, creating a user friendly environment where everything can be linked. MySpace has even joined in on the Data Portability Project and is therefore leading the way in the social networking domain. This is a key feature of gatewatching, where information (that users create) is free to be shared among the internet instead of being controlled by a centralised corporate organisation that owns the website containing the content. This example proves that gatewatching is not limited to any type of internet content. Gatekeeping however, exists where corporate business has the power to control (their) content.

Due to the pace of the internet, "gatewatching is iterative: the material passing through the output gates of news blogs is further watched as potential source material by other gatewatchers" (Bruns 2006, 16). Therefore, in allowing material to be accessed by anyone on the internet, you are basically publishing content that is open for feedback, that in some cases will be critical. You are opening a conversation through the digital medium, however some may see it as knowledge, whether it is fact or not. That is obviously why Wikipedia has received criticism for its unreliable output of information. Particularly its use of 'pedia', inferring that it is an encyclopedia, when traditional encyclopedias were published in book volumes and did have the editing process of gatekeeping involved. In turn, probably the biggest difference between gatekeeping and gatewatching is that gatekeeping is a formal, trusted practice and gatewatching is purely informal as well as being more common in the digital environment.

References

Bruns, A. 2006. The Practice of News Blogging. In Uses of Blogs, ed. A. Bruns and J. Jacobs, 11-22, New York: Peter Lang Publishing.

Hartley, J. 2005. Communication, Cultural and Media Studies. 3rd ed. London: Routledge.

Citizen Journalism and the power of free thought

Citizen journalism definitely has its benefits, as well as disadvantages. It is no surprise that many Journalists have criticized the concept, especially in its early days. Many of these criticisms were based around ideas that the information produced by amateurs was not of high standards, yet it was probably more of a fear of losing an audience. Yet the web has proved a success for traditional news companies as well and CNN and the BBC are among the leaders in embracing the technology of the internet. A common feature of news websites now includes blogging, so in fact journalists are welcoming web 2.0 and so they should. It could be argued that the news has become more user friendly with the internet and it has even saved the industry through its ability to spread information at a fast pace and interact with younger generations of audiences.

One of the facts about citizen journalism is that it enables anyone to give their point of view without having to worry about gatekeeping. This means that virtually any topic can be raised with all points of view covered somewhere on the web. The web is therefore a portal for free thought. Though without search engines to guide users to this free thought it is a lot more difficult to access because of the fact that there is so much content on the web. Which makes it hard to believe that so much more content is added everyday. Yet Google is one example of the expansive array of content on the web. This search engine has expanded with the internet, adding videos, images and maps to name a few of the added capabilities the company has created. And with more web 2.0 applications being tested and tried, more is available to create on the web. And that brings another issue of whether citizen journalism will still be relevant in the future. It is possible that blogs and whatever invention improves on this technology may mean that people do not want to just report on issues, they may feel that social writing is more relevant than a standard article. And web 2.0 allows some sort of freedom on this level which means that citizen journalists can update or add to their public writings. OhmyNews obviously believes in the power of citizens to create credible news, with money incentives giving the public more reason to communicate through the web.

One recent claim surrounding content on the web, particularly scholarly information, is that the web does not support this type of information, rather the web is catering to Wikipedia style information that cannot be relied upon for its accuracy. The idea is that there is a need for more scholarly based content, from written work to video lectures and interviews, so companies, including Google, are making plans on providing this content. Mahalo is a search engine that claims to find quality information, while Big Think is basically a You Tube specializing in the creation and publicity of ideas. Similarly, Google's Knol is an abbreviation for knowledge. Yet take SlideShare, for example, a powerpoint presentation sharing website and here is information sharing working at its best, providing resources, including those from academics for the rest of the world to share, if they choose to set their sharing to public. It seems that the future for university knowledge is perhaps to provide it through the internet, possibly even for free?