Download the eBook (8.25 MB) - ECREA Thematic Sections

Diversity of Journalisms. Proceedings of ECREA/CICOM Conference, Pamplona, 4-5 July 2011
Social media, participatory journalism and Web 2.0
What is the distinction between social media and Web 2.0? Social media can be
described as a concept or model that includes participation, networking, information
sharing, user-generated content as well as innovating and spending time together.
(Aunesluoma, Majava & Wilenius 2010; Kaplan & Haenlein 2010; Kim, Jeong & Lee
2010; Boyd & Ellison 2008; Castells 2007; Lietsala & Sirkkunen 2008.) Reader
participation has been described as we media, distributed journalism, participatory
media, open source journalism and participatory journalism (Deuze 2006; Gillmor 2006;
Rosen 2005; 2004; Bowman & Willis 2003; Pavlik 2001). The influence of active
readers is transforming journalism from gatekeeping to gatewatching (Burns 2008).
Domingo et al. (2008) claimed that the emergence of participatory journalism is
influenced by external factors such as technology, economy and the broader social and
cultural framework.
Web 2.0 is perhaps more connected to technology. It is focused on consumer needs
like the scalability of the systems employed. Kaplan & Haenlein (2010) highlight that
although Web 2.0 does not refer to any specific technical update of the World Wide
Web, there is a set of basic functionalities that are necessary for its functioning, for
example RSS, Adobe Flash, and Ajax (Asynchronous Java Script). According to Ebner
& Scheifner (2008), the most important and visible manifestations of Web 2.0
technologies are weblogs. Web 2.0 and social media are very much a symbiotic
relationship of technology and new culture.
The change of journalism
The rise of a new way of thinking, i.e. sharing and creating content together with
readers, has had its influence on journalism. Every newspaper must think how to react
to reader demands for user-generated content, to what extent to accept comments and
discussion on the web, and how to moderate this content.
Deuze (2003) highlights the differences between open and closed journalism by means
of a diagram, which includes the instrumental and orientating dimensions of Bardoel
(1996). The diagram also includes elements relating to public participation: monitorial
journalism, i.e. the extent to which content produced by the public is moderated, and
dialogical journalism, i.e. the extent to which professional journalists enter into
discussion with the public. In the diagram (figure 1), journalistic culture is either closed
from the orientating or monitorial point of view, or open from the instrumental or
dialogical point of view. In closed journalistic culture, content is typically not added to
the content produced by professionals, and the content has the primary purpose of
providing background information and orientation. If the public is given the opportunity
to contribute, this content is also monitored and moderated. Conversely, in open
journalistic culture the public is allowed to participate instrumentally, i.e. online
technologies are utilised for the distribution of content even if this content has been
produced by professional journalists. Online technologies are utilised, for example, by
offering hyperlinks to content produced by other journalists. Open journalistic culture is
130