We're all reporters in the digital democracy - Emily Bell

This was a post in The Guardian on Monday March 20th 2006.

It immediately introduces the impact that the audience is having on mainstream media. She introduces it with the phrase "democratisation of media".

She states that over the last 3 years, the main changes have been the:

• speed
• volume
• and type of response that has been made available by the internet, broadband delivery and digitised media.

It is implied that if an event as big as the September 11th terror attacks occured these days, the way it would be reported would be very different as the internet has progressed past the level of forms of media available then.

Mobile phones are a key example of this. Videos and pictures that can be captured by using phones are now uploaded onto the computer and spread all around the net.

Local newspapers are also allowing their own residents to write their articles now instead of paid reporters. However this raises contreversy with national affairs and organisations.

Material such as pictures and videos are then generated by the mainstream media into it's own, and it could be argued that it is exploitation of free material, but Emily Bell disagrees and believes that we are not far from the point where citizen journalists ask for payment for their best exclusive material. She talks about how media organisations have to do is make sure their communities have both the right tools to use on their websites and learn how to grow and engage with communities.

Bell ends her article with a question - Is there a difference then between the professional journalist and the citizen contributor?

She concludes that there is. One casually contributes their expertise, and the other is paid for an ability to make jusgements on how to convey stories or content in the most effective way. She states that what the professional journalist can provide does not contain more quality than what a citizen journalist can provide anymore - if it ever could.