Lippmann-like, but Open for Feedback

While personally, I agree with Lippmann’s insight in to the role of journalism in a complex society, I maintain it is not an ideal set up due to potential for abuses of power. The general public is in need of experts of topics to explain their relevance in layman’s language. No one person can devote the time and energy necessary to have a depth of understanding on such a diverse world of topics. We must defer to experts but with the potential for these experts to mislead, knowingly or not, they must be available for questioning and vetting. Standards of reporting by the experts must be maintained.

The best cases for Dewey I have recently viewed was a RAND study on developing Democracy in nations such as Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan where Progressive thinkers exist, have an audience, but a safe platform for informal sharing needs to be provided.
RAND’s theory stands that Democratic thought in a region cannot be imposed but must rise organically. Providing the forum for discussion can enable that and highlight it.
One cannot understand the environment if one does not participate in the setting. So the initiative must come from the citizens themselves. They must become citizen journalists with a deep understanding of
Self-censorship and responsible content: “ In volatile settings, one must consider the impact of ones words.” Said one Iraqi Blogger. In my estimation this is the highest role public can play journalism, letting their voice and experience be heard clearly either though representatives or responsibly for themselves.

"A free press," said Churchill "is the unsleeping guardian of all the other rights that free men prize. It is tyranny's greatest foe."

The traditional newspaper shifting to the internet could create more opportunities for reader and community input by using the “mullet strategy” employed by the Huffington post, With a classic front page of stories including “Boring but Important” news that readers may not have readily chosen but should be aware of, written by journalism professionals and vetted through editorial process followed by more personalized sections of local and/or personal interest topics. The “Boring but Important” section could report on topics that the public need know about but may not have enthusiastic interest in pursuing like congressional voting, changes in tax laws, or business trends.

The public is indeed like a deaf observer at he back of a sporting event…. and we need someone with an elevated viewpoint to give up the blow by blow reporting of events and help us gather context and history surrounding it Perhaps this all-seeing educator is not entirely objective, welcome to the human condition. They can make an effort at unbiased inquiry and then form an opinion, or not.
Perhaps this educator is not all-seeing, but they have more of a view than I. I personally want to get my news from a source who is better informed than I on a topic. I want an educator who can lead me through questions and let me then discuss further with people interested in the topics. Sometimes the expert does not have all the information, then the conversation needs to include those who do.

Most certainly there is room for citizen journalism. The beauty of a blog is that opinions may fly free. The distinction is that this is not news. It is a conversation. These conversations can become news but their most important function is to connect communities of like minded folk. Oppositional communities are formed as well in the process. Indeed an entire spectrum of communities pop up quite organically. They remain however, in need of a common starting point, a set of facts from which to work.

The best current media can do is provide a platform for citizen journalist participation without sacrificing professional principles of journalism. These two realms need be clearly divided and marked lest reporting fall in to opinion shouting matches of the lowest common denominator.