General, Journalism

Having been round this ‘iReport’ block before chasing wild haggis, this is all very interesting…

Now this is interesting. Not that everything else isn’t, but me and Kyle have been round the ‘block’ before. Me, initially, for the simple fact that CNN paid $750,000 for just the ownership of the url; Kyle for far more telling reasons…

More of that in a mo… first the ‘news’ story that triggered the latest question marks to be applied to CNN’s user-generated off-spring. A bast*rd child if ever there was one – if, that is, the CNN suits care a monkey’s about the ‘brand’.

Anyway, rumours of Steve Job’s demise have, it seems, been greatly exaggerated. Just as reports of wild haggis roaming the forests of Scotland were…,0,6800958.story

All of which brings us back to this… where we found ourselves back in April. On the chase of Kyle’s wonderful wild haggis…

Now, clearly the home page has changed again since last we spoke; but the dilemma facing those in charge of the iReport ‘news desk’ clearly hasn’t… when, exactly, do they let the truth get in the way of a good story?

To quote Jeff’s piece, there is clearly an element of ‘vetting’ going on…

‘CNN president Jonathan Klein said at a McGraw-Hill conference some months ago that the point of iReport was to have a place to accept stuff from citizens and witnesses that wasn’t CNN. Only that which is vetted, he said, goes up under the CNN brand. But, of course, iReport is near the CNN brand…’

But clearly not enough.

Or is it simply a case of CNN wanting it both ways? That it’s CNN bringing you the news first when the punters are right? And yet having nothing to do with their ‘news’ when the punters are wrong..? �

speak up

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site.

Subscribe to these comments.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

*Required Fields