Comments

Quick question

You've quoted them to say "We don't need photojournalists!" - just looking for where they actually say that?

eyes wide shut

if its quantity instead of quality of submitted material, that they are chasing. for no doubt less money paid to contributors and less overheads, then they are on the right track. If they think they can maintain CNN's high visual content standards doing this, then IMO they are mistaken.

Differentiation

If they rely on submissions/images from consumers through social media, how will they differentiate their news coverage from the "on the ground" accounts people can get from the same social media sites?

Surely, the strength of old media titles now is that they can offer high quality analysis and comment. Just as journalists offer the writing for this, photojournalists offer the imagery.

If you look at publications such as The Guardian and The Times, they place a special emphasis on professional photography, particularly photojournalism. And they've done well with Eye Witness and Spectrum respectively.

Why is CNN's approach to stop playing to their strengths and start featuring content that you can get anywhere else on the internet?

Also, will CNN observe proper licensing procedures when using content found on social media? Experience with a number of news outlets shows probably not.

So, CNN makes a move towards run-of-the-mill content that's likely to be in breach of copyright...

German TV station wants to cut videojournalists

I just read on newsroom.de that a german tv station wants to follow cnn and cut jobs in the editorial department, because the youtube and twitter pics get directly into the system. The article can be found here (in german): http://www.newsroom.de/news/detail/$GUKWFPEMJPJN/weil_brgerreporter_immer_besser_werden_cnn_entlsst_mitarbeiter_-_deutscher_sender_will_beispiel_folgen , it is full of interesting facts about cnn. The author even talked with Andre Zalbertus. He is already a legend and introduced videojournalism to germany. Newsroom.de is a reliable source, as it is the number one place for media news in germany, austria and switzerland.

IReport

I'm curious about what kind of agreement CNN has with the people who upload content in CNN IReport. They are pushing hard this kind of citizen journalism, just take a look http://ireport.cnn.com/

cnn does not get it

Now we understand why before each video or image CNN says the cannot verify the images however here they are.

The day will come that they are very sorry that they do not have professional journalists on the ground.

Orwell Marches On

CNN is an agenda driven news "source", and as such, truth never mattered, only content that they like matters. Therefore it is a simple matter of replacing one thing with another. It is about utility not quality for them, because it is about agendas not truth. This is the same for all major news media outlets, even if they claim otherwise. Many "news" stories are just editorial opinion clothed as news. So accuracy is not that big a deal, what matters is that the content meets the need of the agenda. It is just Orwellian making of history going on. They all get there 15 minutes of hate by tuning into FOX news and getting their juices flowing, they are then inspired to work harder at reporting their self-delusional paradigms.it is the same with NBC, CBS and ABC, and the New York Times.

Strike back!

The question is not if CNN needs photojournalists but if photojournalists need CNN.
If you don't value your work nobody will.

Trust

The measure of a news agency such as CNN is based on how much they can be trusted to report the news accurately and honestly. The reason why you employ a photojournalist is because they are a skilled professional, who can be trusted to document and report.

I see the benefits of UGC. However I remain to be convinced that it is not as destructive as it is useful. Just look at hurricane Sandy and the amount of false imagery that surrounded that event - which a lot of big news organizations published. The fact is that this content is coming unknown sources in some cases - sources with an agenda sometimes. It is easy to jump on the most stunning image (sharks swimming around flooded cars, storms rolling in behind the statue of liberty). By doing so you could be publishing a lie and moving further away from that thing that defines whether you succeed in reporting news - trust.

This batch of layoffs is a serious erosion of quality within CNN. Unfortunately this is a sign of more to come - as this erosion won't stop at the PJ's.

Not needed anyhow

News media workers who take pictures to enhance their "stories" do so in a manner not much above the quality of a snapshot, if experience informs. In fact, looking at virtually any photograph taken by a NMW, an observer could easily conclude a snapshooter took the photograph, owing to the absence of many of not most of the rules and principles of good photography used in the generation of the product. NMWs may of course have access to crime scenes, natural disasters, important events, and suchlike denied to a snapshooter. This access does give some value to a NMW photograph beyond that of a snapshot. The decision-makers at CNN, perhaps unwittingly, applied this distinction when terminating several picture-taking NMWs. They did not see the nominal value of access as worth the cost of gaining it given the sameness of picture-taking by NMWs and the public.