Yeah fuck Matt Caito, I hate that guy. AHMED HAS CARRIED MATT FOR YEARS NOW, RECOGNIZE HIS CONTRIBUTIONS AND GET JESS (THAT GERIATRIC GRANDMA) AWAY FROM HIM TO REUNITE THE COUPLE!!!!!
Matt Caito … being allocated towards traditional forms of journalism and institutions that produce press The reason why this is true is that as the widespread consumption of citizen journalism has precipitated increased production of it as producers strive to meet demand. This is why particular production has created the incentives and norms for individual citizens to produce more of this kind of journalism we think that therefore it likely means that insofar as that consumption does not happen other sources take that place secondly we think insofar as consumption represents time dedicated towards reading collecting and analyzing citizen journalism that people are engaging with people probably spend the time that they're spending engaging with that citizen journalism elsewhere in so far as people are inherently curious and have a drive to find out information in the world and so on we think they likely means they revert to more traditional forms of news sources as well thirdly insofar as there's likely still demand for authenticity in reporting and there is a revealed preference of stories that citizen journalists break because they happen to be well placed them like if they're on the ground in a major city when an event is happening like a terrorist attack or a war we think would likely still be efforts to cater to that demographic insofar as people have a real preference for that kind of reporting so this looks like things like more embedded reporting more summaries of these things like ethnographies more reporting on the ground through major news organizations and attempt to try to get boots on the ground in places like combat zones and so on and so forth
crucially and the absence of the rise of these things which already exists these things would get more traction insofar as people try to seek out the nearest thing to it and so far as the rise did not happen *get more traction = becoming more popular What we think “the rise” specifically look like is the accompanying credibility …:what has happened in terms of the rise is on aggregate, significantly more of it has been produced than it has been in the past and the accompanying rising Norms of it has increased credibility generated towards it I think the best government (I think he meant opposition) argument in this debate is to say citizen journalism is really important in some instances because individuals can see how like situations on the ground are unfolding in places like Ukraine when it's at war in the media aftermath of 9/11 because sometimes it isn't journalists are placed really well to like respond to things and this produces good information (2 responses) + One I think that's all challenging and destructive. Often this distorts rather than provides good information but + secondly insofar as there's demand for these kinds of things the counter factual framing that I've just given like … that to an extent [Argument 1:] Why do we get better funded investing reporting and why do we think that's good ~Before I go on I'll take the clarification from closing POI from CO: This debate is going to be very messy if you do not tell us what citizen reporting is and like give a few examples of it so we know what we're doing Matt response: It says in the info slide it's like when citizens do reporting and then publish those articles online independently or they get picked up by news platforms it says so in the info slide~
Moving on why do we get better funded investigator reporting and why is that good + the reason this point is important good and accurate journalism gives people information that they can act on with confidence as opposed to misinformation that distorts reality +The reason why accurate information is good is because accurate information allows me to make decisions about my life and act upon those things I increase my agency which leads the ability for me to access my idea of what is good + The second reason this point is important is insofar as the rises in journalism precipitate a direct and specific trade-off in terms of the credibility of news we think that's been quite problematic. The rise of this trend means that you saw citizen journalists being viewed with increased credibility and the rise also means that you saw companies funding this publishing this and as it had a direct trade-off with better investigative reporting. What this has meant is that you've had an active time trade-off with the engagement with better forms of journalism that is both more accurate and more investigative and provide better utility to society in terms of increasing agency There are three ways this has happened (this = time trade-off with investigative reporting) + Firstly insofar as there has been this direct trade-off between investigative reporting and citizen journalism -> less funding for investigative reporters -> they break generally fewer big stories since it's much harder to do when there are fewer resources being allocated for do you can't chase as many news stories or pursue as many individual leads as you might like when your paper is cutting back on the amount of funding that they're giving to you because a. trade-off in terms of funding and b. there's been less demand for those kind of things + secondly papers get less resources and put less resources to these kinds of things because they don't generate things like revenue streams clicks, they platform citizen journalists instead that's highly problematic insofar as they put less resources towards the developing of these stories in the first place preemptively so even if other people are currently still researching those things on the ground they're less likely to do so in the future
+ thirdly, papers are prompted to cut costs and these things often go first because they've seen as less essential and it's easier for like a news aggregator website that platforms news stories around the internet to platform of random citizen journalists and so far as it's popular and beloved as opposed to another form of in engagement The impact of all of this is that you get + firstly just less accurate information but also less good investigative reporting as well insofar as many of these journalists break high profile news stories like the hashtag metoo movement for example: these news stories happen less frequently which is individuals on aggregate let's get less often good information in general this also means that independent journalists and small journalists news organizations that currently obviously cannot compete with large news organizations like the New York Times or CNN but do have a specific niche on the ground in a local community also get out competed quite quickly because insofar as they adhere to specific standards like journalistic integrity they're less able to do so and less able to like access funding as now they have direct competition with these citizen journalists who get a greater degree of consumption. These organizations necessarily die the fastest insofar as they have the least amount of budgets and get cut the most + secondly the faith and credibility in journalism note that the rising consumption has created a trend of more people doing the citizen journalism in order to meet demand Why is citizen journalism actively quite bad and here I'll elaborate a little bit more on what it often looks like in order to POI + firstly citizen journalists often take risks reporters wouldn't they're therefore more likely to get themselves into dangerous situations like embedding themselves in a war zone without the necessary precautions taken in the first place + secondly they don't have institutional support from a news organization and so on which means in the pursuit of a story if they get into trouble I either have to fail a lawsuit
or they break a contract they violate the Integrity of the source they don't have the requisite tools to cope with that kind of thing going into the future which means they're likely to when they take risks being significantly greater pecuniary (relating to or connected with money) troubles and also being significantly greater trouble in terms of actually being able to actively follow up on the story which means they're more likely to publish things like misinformation and they're more likely to not be able to fact check their sources as comprehensively as a major news organization can + thirdly they can't protect source confidentiality this means fewer people talk to them fewer people are likely to want to engage in the kind of Journalism that they do which means it's just vastly more likely that these people just don't engage to the same degree + fourthly they don't have regulations on their behavior to the same extent there aren't Norms within corporate newsrooms to the same degree that prohibit certain forms of conduct. This means in so far as the rise of Citizen journalism and everybody believes they can do it as precipitated things like harassment campaigns and Tick Tock like on Tick Tock under the guise of Citizen journalism and so far it's pumping more people and engaging like independent investigative reporting that has led to privacy violations of people like during the whole Brian Landry investigation when they started like I don't know harassing his parents on social media and things like that and interfere with active FBI investigation or anything that's probably quite bad what this does is not ideal in terms of faith and credibility in the media undermines the degree to which people who engage with these media sources in order to gain trust in them feel that this media is credible in in and of itself insofar as there's less credibility in these types of reporting because the type of reporting that they do is necessarily quite bad we think the faith and credibility in the media goes down in general Why is this counter factual better I think firstly just the norms and journalistic standards that corporate newsrooms have are significantly better in terms of accesses to resources in terms of Regulation about what they're able to do and resources to help field litigation on behalf of reporters investigate and you end up in a dire situation.
Look, ultimately what the Horizon citizen journalists has done is cause competition that has killed smaller news organizations put individual citizens in danger and in its worst cases precipitated violent harassment and all kinds of other problems we're very proudest in opening governmentso
For all their achievements, there is such a thing as speaking too fast and Caito and TIm do. Really just hard to listen to.
Yeah fuck Matt Caito, I hate that guy. AHMED HAS CARRIED MATT FOR YEARS NOW, RECOGNIZE HIS CONTRIBUTIONS AND GET JESS (THAT GERIATRIC GRANDMA) AWAY FROM HIM TO REUNITE THE COUPLE!!!!!
1st speaker speaks like a robot(on a sarcastic ground)
Nice!
Matt Caito
… being allocated towards traditional forms of journalism and institutions that produce press
The reason why this is true is that as the widespread consumption of citizen journalism has precipitated increased production of it as producers strive to meet demand. This is why particular production has created the incentives and norms for individual citizens to produce more of this kind of journalism we think that therefore it likely means that insofar as that consumption does not happen other sources take that place
secondly we think insofar as consumption represents time dedicated towards reading collecting and analyzing citizen journalism that people are engaging with people probably spend the time that they're spending engaging with that citizen journalism elsewhere in so far as people are inherently curious and have a drive to find out information in the world and so on we think they likely means they revert to more traditional forms of news sources as well
thirdly insofar as there's likely still demand for authenticity in reporting and there is a revealed preference of stories that citizen journalists break because they happen to be well placed them like if they're on the ground in a major city when an event is happening like a terrorist attack or a war we think would likely still be efforts to cater to that demographic insofar as people have a real preference for that kind of reporting so this looks like things like more embedded reporting more summaries of these things like ethnographies more reporting on the ground through major news organizations and attempt to try to get boots on the ground in places like combat zones and so on and so forth
crucially and the absence of the rise of these things which already exists these things would get more traction insofar as people try to seek out the nearest thing to it and so far as the rise did not happen
*get more traction = becoming more popular
What we think “the rise” specifically look like is the accompanying credibility …:what has happened in terms of the rise is on aggregate, significantly more of it has been produced than it has been in the past and the accompanying rising Norms of it has increased credibility generated towards it
I think the best government (I think he meant opposition) argument in this debate is to say citizen journalism is really important in some instances because individuals can see how like situations on the ground are unfolding in places like Ukraine when it's at war in the media aftermath of 9/11 because sometimes it isn't journalists are placed really well to like respond to things and this produces good information
(2 responses)
+ One I think that's all challenging and destructive. Often this distorts rather than provides good information but
+ secondly insofar as there's demand for these kinds of things the counter factual framing that I've just given like … that to an extent
[Argument 1:] Why do we get better funded investing reporting and why do we think that's good
~Before I go on I'll take the clarification from closing
POI from CO: This debate is going to be very messy if you do not tell us what citizen
reporting is and like give a few examples of it so we know what we're doing
Matt response: It says in the info slide it's like when citizens do reporting and then publish those articles online independently or they get picked up by news platforms it says so in the info slide~
Moving on why do we get better funded investigator reporting and why is that good
+ the reason this point is important good and accurate journalism gives people information that they can act on with confidence as opposed to misinformation that distorts reality
+The reason why accurate information is good is because accurate information allows me to make decisions about my life and act upon those things I increase my agency which leads the ability for me to access my idea of what is good
+ The second reason this point is important is insofar as the rises in journalism precipitate a direct and specific trade-off in terms of the credibility of news we think that's been quite problematic. The rise of this trend means that you saw citizen journalists being viewed with increased credibility and the rise also means that you saw companies funding this publishing this and as it had a direct trade-off with better investigative reporting. What this has meant is that you've had an active time trade-off with the engagement with better forms of journalism that is both more accurate and more investigative and provide better utility to society in terms of increasing agency
There are three ways this has happened (this = time trade-off with investigative reporting)
+ Firstly insofar as there has been this direct trade-off between investigative reporting and citizen journalism -> less funding for investigative reporters -> they break generally fewer big stories since it's much harder to do when there are fewer resources being allocated for do you can't chase as many news stories or pursue as many individual leads as you might like when your paper is cutting back on the amount of funding that they're giving to you because a. trade-off in terms of funding and b. there's been less demand for those kind of things
+ secondly papers get less resources and put less resources to these kinds of things because they don't generate things like revenue streams clicks, they platform citizen journalists instead that's highly problematic insofar as they put less resources towards the developing of these stories in the first place preemptively so even if other people are currently still researching those things on the ground they're less likely to do so in the future
+ thirdly, papers are prompted to cut costs and these things often go first because they've seen as less essential and it's easier for like a news aggregator website that platforms news stories around the internet to platform of random citizen journalists and so far as it's popular and beloved as opposed to another form of in engagement
The impact of all of this is that you get
+ firstly just less accurate information but also less good investigative reporting as well insofar as many of these journalists break high profile news stories like the hashtag metoo movement for example: these news stories happen less frequently which is individuals on aggregate let's get less often good information in general this also means that independent journalists and small journalists news organizations that currently obviously cannot compete with large news organizations like the New York Times or CNN but do have a specific niche on the ground in a local community also get out competed quite quickly because insofar as they adhere to specific standards like journalistic integrity they're less able to do so and less able to like access funding as now they have direct competition with these citizen journalists who get a greater degree of consumption. These organizations necessarily die the fastest insofar as they have the least amount of budgets and get cut the most
+ secondly the faith and credibility in journalism note that the rising consumption has created a trend of more people doing the citizen journalism in order to meet demand
Why is citizen journalism actively quite bad and here I'll elaborate a little bit more on what it often looks like in order to POI
+ firstly citizen journalists often take risks reporters wouldn't they're therefore more likely to get themselves into dangerous situations like embedding themselves in a war zone without the necessary precautions taken in the first place
+ secondly they don't have institutional support from a news organization and so on which means in the pursuit of a story if they get into trouble I either have to fail a lawsuit
or they break a contract they violate the Integrity of the source they don't have the requisite tools to cope with that kind of thing going into the future which means they're likely to when they take risks being significantly greater pecuniary (relating to or connected with money) troubles and also being significantly greater trouble in terms of actually being able to actively follow up on the story which means they're more likely to publish things like misinformation and they're more likely to not be able to fact check their sources as comprehensively as a major news organization can
+ thirdly they can't protect source confidentiality this means fewer people talk to them fewer people are likely to want to engage in the kind of Journalism that they do which means it's just vastly more likely that these people just don't engage to the same degree
+ fourthly they don't have regulations on their behavior to the same extent there aren't Norms within corporate newsrooms to the same degree that prohibit certain forms of conduct. This means in so far as the rise of Citizen journalism and everybody believes they can do it as precipitated things like harassment campaigns and Tick Tock like on Tick Tock under the guise of Citizen journalism and so far it's pumping more people and engaging like independent investigative reporting that has led to privacy violations of people like during the whole Brian Landry investigation when they started like I don't know harassing his parents on social media and things like that and interfere with active FBI investigation or anything that's probably quite bad what this does is not ideal in terms of faith and credibility in the media undermines the degree to which people who engage with these media sources in order to gain trust in them feel that this media is credible in in and of itself insofar as there's less credibility in these types of reporting because the type of reporting that they do is necessarily quite bad we think the faith and credibility in the media goes down in general
Why is this counter factual better I think firstly just the norms and journalistic standards that corporate newsrooms have are significantly better in terms of accesses to resources in terms of Regulation about what they're able to do and resources to help field litigation
on behalf of reporters investigate and you end up in a dire situation.
Look, ultimately what the Horizon citizen journalists has done is cause competition that has killed smaller news organizations put individual citizens in danger and in its worst cases precipitated violent harassment and all kinds of other problems we're very proudest in opening governmentso