Planet Abell

R emember the name Mark LaCroix. Lacroix, a guy who lives in Minneapolis, carried CNN and blew away local coverage for the first crucial 20 minutes of today's collapsed bridge story , proving compelling, articulate live accounts after sending about five pictures of the destroyed span -- about what a pro's first dump would be. He even had the presence of mind to send CNN a filer, only a week old, of the intact bridge. CNN's producers didn't think to immediately make use of that image until LaCroix mentioned it in passing to a surprised Wolf Blitzer, who asked on the air that it be broadcast immediately. Because of LaCroix, CNN's coverage was superior to that of their local affiliate, whose on-air anchors were reduced to time-killing babble over the ambiguous video of a fixed-position (likely security) camera somewhere off in the distance, which did not even cleraly show the collapse as well as it did a nearby intact span. LaCroix's work is on the CNN online story...

"It was journalism to the extent that I went out to capture the truth and present it to the public." … "It has nothing to do with whether or not I'm employed by a corporation or I carry a press pass." -- Josh Wolf I s that enough? Is it even the right argument? Wolf, a videographer and blogger, spent nearly eight months in jail for refusing to cooperate with federal prosecutors who wanted him to give up video of a protest he took and testify before a grand jury. It was said to be the longest contempt-of-court term ever served by someone in a media-related case (though because his status as a journalist is disputed even that claim is controversial.) Wolf was released yesterday after he agreed to give up the video – he posted it in it’s entirely on his site – and answer two written questions from prosecutors. Being too inclusive, by lumping in those whose credentials and commitment are disputable, creates a new jeopardy to journalists whose credentials are not ...

This could be a test of how professional and amateur journalism can cohabitate. It may provide some intriguing insights on how the public perceives the difference between "pro" and "am" content -- if it does -- and which of the two readers tend to prefer in times of crisis vs. calm. Reuters has considerable assets in Africa, a woefully underreported continent with a disproportionate share of suffering and underdevelopment, and is quite capable of parachuting in anything it needs to should the need arise. So its new Africa website , with a fairly balanced mix of news from trusted sources and information and opinion from external blogs, is an interesting experiment in going not only where it has not before but didn't necessarily have to. Rather than just take an overdue opportunity to play to an obvious strength, Reuters seems to be treating this as living laboratory of the pro-am philosophy, putting its money where its mouth is . Africa is difficult (read: exp...