The Hoi Polloi vs. The Professional

Can a group of undefined, untrained people together equal the skill of one trained professional? This is one of the important questions we must ask when newspapers begin considering "crowdsourcing" their information.


picture from http://iplot.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/crowd_2.jpg

According to this article on wired.com, Gannett (publisher of 90 US newspapers) will implement crowdsourcing as part of an overall restructuring of their newspapers by May. Crowdsourcing depends on the general population to gather information instead of a trained professional. The method is said to cut costs and to create more invested readers.

While I think that newspapers need to do some restructuring in order to keep up with the changing industry... changing of course to be more online-friendly... I am not convinced that crowdsourcing can be a consistent or trustworthy method of news gathering.

Since the general public is not trained to perform this task, they may not know how to and they may not always be truthful. In some situations, it may be useful to have the public help research a story, but crowdsourcing loses value when it becomes a permanent method for all news stories. Newspapers will need to spend a significant amount of time checking facts and confirming details. This seems redundant when they have trained reporters who can do this the first time around.

I am pro user-generated content, but in a forum designed for such content, like this blog for instance. Newspapers and reporters, on the other hand, are designed to deliver the truth and that's exactly how it should stay... on paper or online.