91��Ƶ

Image

News no longer belongs solely to journalists. Every day, eyewitnesses upload videos of breaking events, social media users share information in real time, and audiences help shape the stories that spread online. But as more voices enter the conversation, distinguishing trustworthy reporting from misinformation has become increasingly difficult.

That's the challenge Mirjana Pantic, PhD, associate professor at the Dyson College of Arts and Sciences, has spent more than a decade studying. Her book, , draws on years of research into participatory journalism and explores how readers can make sense of today's news ecosystem.

Pantic's interest in participatory journalism began while she was editor in chief of a news website in Serbia. “I noticed was that we started interacting with audiences more than ever before.” Freed from the space constraints of print and broadcast media, digital news can accommodate more voices, allowing organizations to enable comments and even create sections dedicated to stories written by members of the public.

Participatory journalism can take many forms—from reader comments and tips to citizens documenting breaking events as they unfold. "When breaking news events happen, it is not likely that you're going to have a journalist right there when it happens,” she explains. “That's why we rely a lot on citizens to contribute photographs, videos, and information."

We can share whatever we want online, but news organizations carry much more accountability.

Citizen journalism has helped document natural disasters, terrorist attacks, and moments that have shaped public discourse. Pantic points to the police killing of George Floyd as one example. "Without a citizen journalist, we wouldn't be able to see what actually happened. This is why citizen journalism is important."

However, the rise of misinformation has complicated participatory journalism. "When I started doing research on participatory journalism, it was flourishing," says Pantic. "But now it appears as if it is dying." Shrinking newsrooms have fewer resources to moderate comment sections and verify user-generated content, prompting many organizations to scale back reader participation. "Many news organizations simply decided to kill those sections," she explains.

That caution stems from the high stakes of getting it wrong. "They can be sued for what they publish, but they also carry accountability in terms of losing their audiences if what they share turns out to be fake,” Pantic says. “We can share whatever we want online, but news organizations carry much more accountability.”

Pantic explains that not all false content is spread with malicious intent, as misinformation, for instance, is spread unknowingly. According to her, "People see something, they react emotionally, they reshare it right away, and they don't even understand how severe the consequences of that one small act could be.” Rumors spread faster than journalists can verify them, creating a cycle of mistrust. When major news organizations don't immediately report a story, some assume a conspiracy. Pantic states the explanation is usually simpler: “They're not reporting on it because it didn't happen, or they don't have enough evidence to say that things are the way they are.”

That burden of verification, however, is what gives news organizations their value. Pantic recalls a friend who practiced participatory journalism during the Taliban's takeover of Kabul by changing her Tinder location to Afghanistan and speaking with people on the ground through the app. Even as she gathered firsthand accounts ahead of official reports, Pantic recalls, “She didn't believe [what she heard] until the major news organizations began reporting on it.” Even in an age of instant information, people still turn to trusted news organizations to separate fact from fiction.

People see something, they react emotionally, they reshare it right away, and they don't even understand how severe the consequences of that one small act could be.

Digital News Literacy and Participatory Journalism helps readers navigate today’s news landscape with practical strategies, from checking a website's "About Us" page to scanning its coverage for recurring themes. Pantic’s book also explores the left- and right-leaning perspectives of American news outlets, showing readers how to recognize bias rather than avoid it, saying, "You can consult multiple sources and decide what you want to believe."

Pantic's work doesn't end with her book. This fall, she'll launch a new course at 91��Ƶ based on Digital News Literacy and Participatory Journalism and she is also sharing videos related to digital news literacy on her . The book also introduces the growing role of artificial intelligence in journalism, laying the foundation for future research into how AI is reshaping the field.

As the boundaries between journalists and audiences continue to blur, Pantic hopes her book will empower readers to participate in the news responsibly, recognizing that everyone has a role to play in how news is created, shared, and understood.