OJR — AEJMC Hot Topics

Federal court ruling provides a victory for grassroots journalism

From Jason Stverak on OJR, Sept. 29, 2011 – Last month, a federal court ruled that recording public officials, including police officers, is protected by the First Amendment. This decision, which may outrage law enforcement officials and members of Congress, is one of the first federal court decisions that brings the First Amendment into the Internet age.

This case emerged from an incident where a private citizen used his personal cell phone to capture alleged police brutality.

Simon Glik could have walked away when he saw two police officers punching a man in the face. Instead, he pulled out his cellphone and started recording it. When Mr. Glik informed the police officers that he was recording audio, the officer arrested him for violating the state’s wiretap law. He also was charged with disturbing the peace and aiding the escape of a prisoner. The charges were dropped eventually because of lack of merit, but Mr. Glik filed a lawsuit claiming his free-speech rights had been violated.

This latest ruling is especially relevant to those who consider themselves citizen journalists. Before the court’s decision, members of the general public did not have the legal protection guaranteed by state shield laws enjoyed by credentialed journalists.

Read the full article on OJR

A journalist’s guide to the scientific method

By Robert Niles from Online Journalism Review, Aug. 23 – Why should journalists care about the scientific method? I suggested in my post last week that journalism students should take a lab science class to learn about the scientific method. Here’s why I think that’s so important to journalists today.

The scientific method provides a standard procedure through which scientists gather, test and share information. Obviously, part of that should sound familiar because gathering and sharing information is what journalists do, too.

But there are substantial differences between the scientific method and journalism reporting. And while I believe that those differences did not affect journalism’s viability when newspapers had an information monopoly in their communities, our lack of standards for testing information is hurting us in today’s more competitive information market.

Before I go any further, let’s introduce the scientific method, for those readers who aren’t familiar with it. Here’s a good overview of the scientific method:

1. Find a topic or question worth exploring

2. Do some initial, background research to learn about your topic or question. Read what’s been written before.

3. Come up with a hypothesis. This is your best guess of what happened/is happening/will happen, based upon what you already know.

4. Test your hypothesis. You do this by collecting data, either through controlled experimentation or observation.

5. Look at and analyze your data.

6. Based on your analysis, either accept or reject your hypothesis.

7. Publish your information, including all relevant details on how you collected and analyzed your data.

Read the full article