"Unedited.Unfiltered.News" iReport critique

This was my first time visiting the iReport website. It was a bit confusing at first to understand where all the material was and how the comments that readers posted worked. But the site does offer a great variety of voices. There are many stories from many different people. Most of the stories that I read were national stories and not local. The stories were also not fair in their coverage. They would only present one side of any story. But, the commenting feature allowed for other readers to post their contradictory opinions and ideas right below the original story. It seems that the host of the site does not fact- check or spell check any of the stories posted. I did have some trouble reading some of the stories simply because of problems with grammar.

The posts I looked at on the site did not have any quotes or sources cited, they did however have some links that provided the reader with more information relating to the story. Some of the stories seem to be hard news facts, but for the most part the stories are more of people’s opinions on news. The fact that they have no sources cited within the story makes it even more apparent when a story is more opinion then actual news. The posts are written in a narrative storytelling style. It seems like you are being told the story, in conversation as oppose to reading a news story.

At the very top of the ICNN site there is a disclaimer that explains that all the content on the site is user-generated. This site makes it very easy for any one to post. The process is straightforward and easy to follow. The ability for anyone who wishes to post can is evident through the content. You can really see the variety in the number of users that post and the number of people that participate with the stories. The reports are interesting, they certainly provide the reader with information but it is very hard for me to trust the information when I know off the bat that the information has not been fact checked. I guess that just puts more responsibility on me, the reader to check other sites and news outlets to make sure that the information I read was in fact correct. I really liked the organization of the content on the site. I really liked that I could just look at many stories in a shortened version and then decide whether I would want to read the entire story. I also like that they tell you which stories have appeared on CNN.

The content on the site is highly accessible to the public. Anyone who types in the website address into their browser can easily read all the content on the site. Something must also be said for the organization and timeliness of the content. All the stories I looked at were relevant to the day. There was also a lot of very up to the minute posts. The readers and visitors of the site are the sole reason why the site continues to work the way that it does. The readers and visitors keep the site running with their comments and posts to the varying stories.