• July 2015
    M T W T F S S
    « Jun   Sep »
  • Meta

  • Top Posts & Pages

  • Advertisements

UGC / Eyewitness Media and its Implications for News Reporting

As part of my work for the REVEAL project, and REVEAL being a co-organiser, I had been invited to deliver a keynote speech at the “Web Multimedia Verification” Workshop (#wemuv2015). It all took place in conjunction with the ICME Conference in Torino, Italy, on 29 June 2015. In addition, the workshop organisers asked me to write down some thoughts on the matter, possibly for publication in the workshop proceedings. In order to reach a wider audience, I publish these thoughts here, too – and do so in a slightly adapted way.

The growth of UGC / eyewitness media

Content posted and residing in Social Networks by “ordinary citizens” (user-generated content; in short UGC; sometimes also referred to as eyewitness media) has reached enormous dimensions. This has been further facilitated by the constantly increasing number of smartphones with Internet access. Nowadays, it is possible to “report” from almost anywhere in the world, and do so as events unfold, often before professional journalists arrive at the scene.

UGC in news discovery and reporting

Numerous examples illustrate these developments: they range from the events in conflict or war zones (e.g. the war in Syria) to natural disasters (e.g. Hurricane Sandy) to fatal incidents such as the downing of Germanwings flight 9525 in the French Alps or Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 that was brought down in Eastern Ukraine. In all these cases, Social Networks were used heavily as events were unfolding, and information of all kinds subsequently made the rounds.

While it can be beneficial for journalistic reporting to draw on relatively “new” sources and materials that are being contributed by eyewitnesses, using it for journalistic storytelling also carries its dangers. Content can be made to represent something that it is not, or simply be manipulated by those propagating and sharing it.

Serving vested interests

The reasons for producing and spreading inaccurate or wrong information can vary. It can be aimed to serve particular aims, goals and vested interests (e.g. political, commercial, ideological, marketing, propaganda etc.) or simply be done “for the fun of misleading”, or to create attention.

All the above brought a core journalistic necessity back to the scene of attention: the need to verify content. In this case content that is being circulated in Social Networks before it is used in the situation assessment or reporting process.

The importance of verification

Verification in itself is nothing new for the journalistic profession. It always has been (or should have been) a core journalistic task both in newsgathering and reporting. What is new, however, is the need (and challenge) to deal with the increasing amounts of digital content circulated via Social Networks, including its verification.

At present, verification of Social Media content is a comparatively small domain, considering overall sizes of newsrooms. It is mostly done by specialists and is not yet something that is dealt with appropriately by the majority of journalists.

Verification challenges

One problem being is the lack of relevant skills on the side of journalists, and having easy-to-use tools that support the verification process on the system side.

In order to handle Social Media content in a responsible, accurate and timely manner, support is needed. This also becomes obvious when we look at the way Social Media content is currently being verified.

Presently, journalists mostly use a varying set of tools for particular verification tasks. Almost all these tools have originally not been developed for the journalistic profession. They range from tools for image verification such as TinEye or Google’s Reverse Image Search to geodata tools such as Panoramio, Google Maps or Geofeedia, to more general tools such as Wolfram Alpha, people checkers and advanced searches.

While such tools can certainly be highly beneficial for the verification of Social Media content, one issue at present is that the overall process is rather time-consuming and involves a fair bit of manual work.

Tackling some of the verification challenges with REVEAL

All this – plus research that has been done in projects such as REVEAL – indicates that there is a clear need for tools and solutions that facilitate and speed up the verification of Social Media content, providing results that are as accurate as possible, thereby assisting in verification tasks.

So while there is certainly room for improvements and advancements on the technical side (i.e. advancing algorithm-based verification solutions that are easy to use and require relatively little expert skills) it also needs to be stated that – at least in the near future – there will always be a role to play for humans, aka journalists (e.g. for cross-checking, talking directly to an eyewitness etc.).

Opportunities and challenges

In sum: content that is being shared by eyewitnesses via Social Networks offers great opportunities for storytelling and journalistic reporting. It should be one of the core jobs for journalists to make sure that manipulations, hoaxes or false information does not make it into the information distribution cycle. If false information is being circulated, a role for journalists should be to debunk and raise awareness for it. Verification tools that are geared towards journalistic needs and take journalistic requirements into consideration can make great contributions here. There is a definite market potential for such tools and solutions.

Recommended resources

If you are interested in further material on the topic of verification and dealing with user-generated content (aka eyewitness media), I recommend the following (non-exhaustive) selection for starters (last updated: 24 July 2015):



3 Responses

  1. […] UGC and its Implications for News Reporting […]

  2. […] You may also be interested in an article I wrote previously, in which I discuss issues of verification. It can be found here. […]

  3. […] You may also be interested in an article I posted previously on this blog, in which I discuss issues of verification. It can be found here. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: