Especially for those dissing Mensch, Taylor, Schindler et al (and also for the rest of us)

[GliderGuider]

Game Theory, Citizen Journalists, and Media that Can't Keep Up

The crisis of Donald Trump’s collusion with the Russian Federation has given rise to a new term online: citizen journalists. This new “job title” has emerged because, frankly, the major media outlets upon which we depend have failed to keep up with the sheer torrent of new, alarming updates on the perversion of American governance. The actions of the Trump Administration and its complicit legislative branch produce so many questions that, in some sense, it is entirely understandable that the traditional news media cannot react promptly enough to brace for the next hideous update.

Into this void stepped the so-called citizen journalists. Armed with specialized skills from their careers and alarmed for the future of their country, a new group of voices have emerged. Velocity being the most important factor, citizen journalists have mainly emerged from Twitter, where the rapid-fire flow of data and social networking suit this mission the best.

In a few short months, people like Dr. Sarah Kendzior, Andrea Chalupa, John Schindler, Louise Mensch, Claude Taylor, and many others have attracted hundreds of thousands of followers as citizens search for some sense of just what the hell might be going on in the surreal nightmare of Trump’s administration. Drawing from their own deep professional experiences, they and others have transcended the bounds of traditional journalism and shown the public just where this awful story was headed – and why to keep hope alive.

Not everyone has been happy about this.

Check out his fact check of his 127-tweet thread on game theory from 2016, at the bottom of the article.

To those opposed to citizen journalism (even if you disguise your opposition as high-minded seriousness) - tough noogies, it's a new ball game.

[hack89]

1. I am withholding judgement until I see how accurate they are

let me remind you that there are conservative citizen journalist also generating a constant stream of "news". To say that every citizen journalist is objective and unbiased is an unreasonable assumption, whether we agree with their politics or not. I suspect a handful will emerge as reliable and trustworthy sources. The rest are just internet noise.

[leftynyc]

2. I'm finding them interesting

and I follow them on twitter but am withholding "endorsing" them (I don't retweet them) until more things shake out. Right now I can't distinguish between real inside sources and those who engage in wishful thinking.

[Kentonio]

3. There were very good arguments put forward for the rise of bloggers

Which are basically exactly the same kind of arguments being used now for this new term 'citizen journalists'. The problem now (as then) was that being outside the mainstream media also tends to make you outside of any set of journalistic codes. You can write absolute bullshit 99 times out of 100, as long as the 100th time you say something you can point back to as accurate. A lot of people are looking for confirmation of their beliefs not for facts, and the likes of Mensch (a former conservative MP with a crappy record) sit and pump out thousands of tweets all suggesting something might happen, and whenever she's wrong people will say 'she only said it might happen!!' and then when she gets something right she'll be the second coming of christ.

I have very little faith in the kind of 'journalist', citizen or otherwise, who writes tweets to the subjects of legal investigations telling them to get ready for jail. It's childish, utterly inappropriate and makes me far less likely to believe what other things she says.

[Cicada]

4. Why would a source leak to an amateur rather than to Wash Post?

No established news outlet has published one of these stories. If the stories were real why hasn't a source leaked to a respected news outlet?

[GliderGuider]

6. There are a few reasons

1. Trusted personal relationships.

2. While these people may be amateurs (in the best sense of that word) at journalism, they are usually professionals in other areas that may make them better able to understand and contextualize the information being leaked.

3. A desire to get an urgent breaking story out in the public eye immediately, rather than having to wait 2 weeks to a month for an MSM to develop the story.

[PDittie]

5. I'm in the New Republic camp on this

https://newrepublic.com/minutes/142650/stop-promoting-liberal-conspiracy-theories-twitter

[m-lekktor]

7. I googled this Eric Garland guy and now I know not to take HIM seriously either.

There is an interesting piece at slate about him, "The Rise of the Alt-Center. Why did establishment liberals fall in love with a deranged Twitter thread? It’s time for some game theory". I am not going to bother to post links because I am sure someone will find fault with the author or some other excuse. He's probably a right winger etc or something (Louise Mensch is a right winger, an ex Tory MP but THAT is ok *snicker*)

I can't take seriously conspiracy theorist apologists.

[GliderGuider]

8. What if the conspiracy isn't a theory?

Garland isn't exactly a kook: http://www.ericgarland.co/about-eric-garland/

In times of urgent crisis (like this), the world needs a little less sober beard-stroking, and more people willing to say what they think.

Oh, and re Mensch's conservatism - what are the political alignments of the sober MSM journos everyone holds up as standards? Do we even know?

[oasis]

9. Yup. The Nixon/Watergate story went on forever because WP's Ben Bradlee

was such a meticulous gate keeper. For the good of the planet, this Trump matter needs to be resolved at a much faster pace.