Comments on: A Solutions Journalism Response to Gun Violence

By: Josh Stearns (@jcstearns)

Josh Stearns (@jcstearns) — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 19:17:20 +0000

I think this all builds on the history you point to, but also is something different, necessitated both by the state of our communities and the state of journalism, and powered by new tools and connections via the web and social media.

By: Josh Stearns (@jcstearns)

Josh Stearns (@jcstearns) — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 19:15:13 +0000

Vince Stehle of Media Impact Funders has a great piece in the the Chronicle of Philanthropy asking “Why Haven’t Foundations Responded to the Newtown Shootings?” (http://philanthropy.com/article/Why-Haven-t-Foundations/136383/) which he followed up with on the Media Impact Funders blog, including a guest post from J. Mikel Ellcessor, General Manager, WDET, Detroit. (http://mediaimpactfunders.org/2012/12/26/why-havent-foundations-responded-to-the-newtown-shootings/)

In the follow up piece Ellcessor describes how WDET has engaged in the debate over gun violence in their city. It is a good read, and as Ellcessor admits, not a perfect learning curve. Here is an excerpt that sets up the piece:

“Perhaps the difficulty, for both foundations and media, in addressing the roots and causes of gun violence is the fact that it’s a tangled mix of issues. Any meaningful response will require long-term commitment to achieve results. If my reading of recent trends is correct, both foundations and the media are favoring approaches and projects that have a distinct beginning, middle and end with clear, measurable impact and outcomes.

This is a mistake.

The reality of gun violence doesn’t fall into a clear, linear storytelling narrative and making a difference in the space won’t show up in a 12 or even 24 month impact report.

At the same time, public service institutions are struggling to confront and address their relevance and truly serve their communities. Focusing on crises like gun violence is at the core of public media’s mandate – to inform, engage and discuss critical social concerns as citizens, communities and as a nation.”

By: Hans Ibold (@HansIbold)

Hans Ibold (@HansIbold) — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 15:39:41 +0000

Thanks for the post, Josh. Do you think these “deeper” forms of community engagement are different from the many so-called public journalism or civic journalism efforts of decades past? Is there something different today with the kinds of conversations enabled by new media (as Laura points out in her comment) or with the role of the journalist?

By: Josh Stearns

Josh Stearns — Mon, 17 Dec 2012 02:29:48 +0000

On Twitter, Susie Cagle also pointed me to the excellent Oakland Effects project (http://www.oaklandeffect.com) run by Scott Johnson (@scott_c_johnson) and publishing stories in the Oakland Tribune and Bay Area News Group papers. Johson is a Violence Reporting Fellow funded by the California Endowment. Right now, the project is only set for 18-months. According to the website it “will explore key areas that impact the overall health and well-being of the City of Oakland and some surrounding communities.” One of the key verticles on the site is guns and violence. In addition to Johnson’s reporting the project will include “public forums to discuss these issues, as well as Oakland Voices, a community journalism initiative where Oakland residents are trained to become storytellers.”

By: Laura Amico

Laura Amico — Sun, 16 Dec 2012 22:02:53 +0000

Thanks, Josh, for including Homicide Watch DC. Our goal from the beginning was to be a place where conversation could happen. That means our space has to have a three very important characteristics: first, if we want people to have meaningful conversations, we need to make sure they have the tools to have those conversations. That means simple, straight-forward, unbiased reporting. Conversations are based on information; our job is to make sure that information is there and is understandable. Second, our community has to feel like this is a safe space to have a conversation. That’s meant applying a strict comments policy regarding profanity and threats and (most importantly) pre-moderating comments. Third, we need to show the community as often as we can that we value their participation. This comes across quite literally (see our Comments of the Day thread), but I think is also a tone that the site sets. I realize that I am a very, very small participant in how these stories are told and that what is most important is that people feel that they’re being treated fairly as participants in the coverage. An editor thinking about HW recently asked me how we built such an engaged community, and I think this gets at the heart of it. We make sure our community has tools for conversation, feels safe participating, and that their voices are honored. We believe that in order to address the problems of violent crime, the community needs to be able to have, really have, a conversation about it. We hope that we are a part of that process. A shout-out to the Trentonian in Trenton, New Jersey and the Chicago Sun-Times, both of which have committed to hosting these conversations as well using the Homicide Watch platform.