On April 15, the London Free Press launched an initiative to help the community better interact with the paper. Citizens can now contact the paper with ideas, and the paper will provide an editor to help bring those stories to print — with the citizen’s byline. Innovative, right? Only if you plan on squelching the industry, say freelancers.
On April 15, the London Free Press launched an initiative to help the community better interact with the paper. Or, at least, that was the idea.
According to EIC Joe Ruscitti’s editors note:
“You know lots of things that are happening in the city that we don’t and we know you have lots of ideas we haven’t thought of and we would like to get more of both into the Free Press and onto lfpress.com. It’s time for you to share.”
How? Well, the Free Press wants citizens to use its new tool, dubbed Your Scoop.
“C’mon, admit it,” Ruscitti writes, “It has crossed your mind while mulling the paper over your morning coffee: Reporter . . . that would be a cool job.”
Cool, yes, but also not easy, he cautions. “We’re not lowering the standards of the material we print and post just so you can get your name in lights,” Ruscitti adds, “But we do want to publish your work.”
So how to fix the conundrum? According to the editorial, London Free Press journalist Kelly Pedro is going to help contributors “get the best of your stuff into the paper and on the website.” The paper also plans to hold free seminars on journalism basics.
While this is, arguably, a neat idea, the Free Press makes no mention of paying citizen contributors for their journalistic work. And it’s this last part that has freelancers riled.
On Monday, the Canadian Freelance Union wrote an open letter to Ruscitti expressing its concerns:
“We have no objection whatsoever with members of the public contributing news tips, or pointing to stories that need coverage. This strengthens the paper, and its connection to the community. But your column clearly envisions something much grander. By providing a professional editor to work with these ‘citizen journalists,’ and even offering training, the paper is clearly attempting to replace paid professional journalists with the free work of members of the public.”
It continues:
“In your column, you tempt the readers by saying a reporter’s job is ‘cool.’ Do you know what else is ‘cool?’ Getting paid. Instead of teasing members of the public with the chance to get their name in lights, how about offering something real. How about offering to pay for the work you clearly want?”
So what do you think J-Source readers? Is the London Free Press on to something good, or very, very bad?
[node:ad]
London Free Press call for citizen journos “concerning”: Canadian Freelance Union
On April 15, the London Free Press launched an initiative to help the community better interact with the paper. Citizens can now contact the paper with ideas, and the paper will provide an editor to help bring those stories to print — with the citizen’s byline. Innovative, right? Only if you plan on squelching the industry, say freelancers.
On April 15, the London Free Press launched an initiative to help the community better interact with the paper. Or, at least, that was the idea.
According to EIC Joe Ruscitti’s editors note:
“You know lots of things that are happening in the city that we don’t and we know you have lots of ideas we haven’t thought of and we would like to get more of both into the Free Press and onto lfpress.com. It’s time for you to share.”
How? Well, the Free Press wants citizens to use its new tool, dubbed Your Scoop.
“C’mon, admit it,” Ruscitti writes, “It has crossed your mind while mulling the paper over your morning coffee: Reporter . . . that would be a cool job.”
Cool, yes, but also not easy, he cautions. “We’re not lowering the standards of the material we print and post just so you can get your name in lights,” Ruscitti adds, “But we do want to publish your work.”
So how to fix the conundrum? According to the editorial, London Free Press journalist Kelly Pedro is going to help contributors “get the best of your stuff into the paper and on the website.” The paper also plans to hold free seminars on journalism basics.
While this is, arguably, a neat idea, the Free Press makes no mention of paying citizen contributors for their journalistic work. And it’s this last part that has freelancers riled.
On Monday, the Canadian Freelance Union wrote an open letter to Ruscitti expressing its concerns:
“We have no objection whatsoever with members of the public contributing news tips, or pointing to stories that need coverage. This strengthens the paper, and its connection to the community. But your column clearly envisions something much grander. By providing a professional editor to work with these ‘citizen journalists,’ and even offering training, the paper is clearly attempting to replace paid professional journalists with the free work of members of the public.”
It continues:
“In your column, you tempt the readers by saying a reporter’s job is ‘cool.’ Do you know what else is ‘cool?’ Getting paid. Instead of teasing members of the public with the chance to get their name in lights, how about offering something real. How about offering to pay for the work you clearly want?”
So what do you think J-Source readers? Is the London Free Press on to something good, or very, very bad?
[node:ad]Lauren McKeon
April 26, 2011
I think that this is a very
I think that this is a very bad idea. Regardless of what they say about editing and not lowering journalistic standards, by having articles contributed by random members of the public they are compromising their paper. Basic journalism is not really all that basic at all. It is very hard work and it takes training to remain impartial, not a few seminars with free donuts. Also, stealing work from freelance journalists and giving it to laypeople for free? Its wrong. Journalists have enough trouble finding work. This idea is horrible for the industry and horrible for the people that work in it.
April 26, 2011
It’s something good for the
It’s something good for the LFP: free copy.
It’s something bad for writers: It increases the perception that accurate, useful, well-written content is not worth paying for.
It’s something that could be good or bad for readers of the LFP: Unless the paper really does nurture its amateur “journalists” and provide guidance, there’s going to be a lot of badly written content in the paper. On the other hand, that might persuade the LFP to start paying for content from professionals. But don’t hold your breath.
April 26, 2011
This is like the story all
This is like the story all writers hear and share: “A brain surgeon met a best-selling author at a cocktail party. The brain surgeon said to the author, “When I retire I want to be a writer.” At which point the author replied, “When I retire I want to be a brain surgeon.”
It’s obvious that print media (particularly newspapers) are taking a big hit with rapid changes in technology, but using citizens to write the copy isn’t the business model that will prop up the industry. Better writers and copy lures and endures.
April 26, 2011
Speaking as one of the “cool”
Speaking as one of the “cool” people, I’m appalled. Why oh why is good writing (and good editing, for that matter) treated as something less than anything else. Nearly 30 years of learning and perfecting my craft — and for what. Way to go, Freep.
April 27, 2011
I’m not sure on the two
I’m not sure on the two choices (good, or very bad) but I am hoping the LFP will respond to the two organizations, the Canadian Freelance Union (CFU) and the Professional Writers Association of Canada (PWAC) who have formally voiced their concerns.
Full disclosure: I am the Executive Director of PWAC.
April 29, 2011
Given the excessively
Given the excessively irritating, over-the-top coverage of the royal wedding, maybe letting the plebes contribute is a good thing.
I really worry about the state of journalism when supposedly professionals journalists working at our national media are churning out utter fluff.
I’d rather read about the bust at the neighbour’s grow op or the challenges facing a single mom than about hats.