Collaborative online news production: Introducing Open Park [and me]

Now that the fall semester is in full swing, I thought I would write a little Intro about my proposed project for the Center for Future Civic Media [C4FCM] where I work as a Research Assistant, and the ideas and ideals behind it.

Since its central themes, as that of my Master's program in Comparative Media Studies, are free speech in all media formats, new and old, including cyber rights, and that my research focuses on preserving them by identifying censorship, control, surveillance and similar threats, I plan to explore ways of creating a free and secure space for the production, exchange and distribution of information, especially of a sensitive, controversial nature, an open space where unpopular opinions will have a place. Investigative journalism is a perfect area in which to explore this.

My ultimate goal is to design a new space for the unhampered practice of free speech in news-making and -sharing. Given my journalism experience in both print, online and broadcast media, I envision a new collaborative newsgathering/reporting tool for journalists, citizen reporters, media professionals and their audience through which they can share their sources, interview notes and other journalistic resources in an environment free of state or corporate interference. One application is for journalists covering the same beat or issue for example. Another is for the media and citizens reporting on disaster/emergency situations such as Katryna.

As for what inspired me to call this new space for public debate 'Open Park': it is based on the concept of a city park - a public space which is pleasant and welcomes free speech - albeit one which is 'open', without fences or limits. Open Park is meant to be a decentralized, open-source and interactive model for use by media producers and consumers in a given community.

The first step in creating this new journalism model is to study the market: what systems for open source news publishing currently exist, what are their pluses and minuses, and to identify the needs for more open, more secure and user-friendly collaborative tools and practices among news content producers. Journalists are possessive of their sources and contacts, and this new model for journalism is pushing boundaries by calling for new habits and practices. But sharing such resources and inside knowledge will lead to better researched, higher-quality investigative stories.

This new, unusual model for reporting/writing news also raises many questions and new challenges: how will the reporters/writers be credited, do we go for a combined byline if 12 people are working on a story or do we need a new system for bylines? How much monitoring/moderating is necessary? Eventually, do we need a new business model in which to implement these new journalism practices?

With a view to address some of these issues and assess the needs and demand for such a collaborative news model, I am currently preparing a survey - a list of questions that I will send out in the communities of print, online and broadcast journalists and media producers in the Boston area. I will also conduct some of my research in these very online pages, here on the C4's internal- and later public Weblogs, and last but not least, through Open Park's Website, currently under construction, which will include an online forum in which you are all welcome to give free rein to your innovative ideas for the future of news/media collaborative production.

The results of my analysis of current shared news production systems will form the basis for a paper for the C4 due in December. For now, I welcome your thoughts, ideas or even proposals for questions to be included in the survey, via the C4's weblogs, email or good old face-to-face.

The upcoming election in the context of the current financial crisis and the post-election public policy decisions and developments here in Boston/Mass should provide ample opportunities to discuss and cover these events in new ways, in the 'Open Park' way. May this debate at least partly start here, with you.

Florence Gallez