So you think you got a story that someone more then your co-workers need to hear? Well if you think your story is news worthy to society, then  submit your story  to a website Like NPR , or just keep exhausting your peers with them. One awesome thing technology has allowed us to do is communicate and share more ideas in society. Journalist also benefit from your stories and input by corwdsourcing.

Crowdsourcing is not a new idea. It has been around for centuries. NPR especially has used it for quite a while, constructing much of their content out of stories and information submitted to them by their listeners and readers.

Survivors of the Great Depression Tell Their Story is such an article. The author crowd sourced, by finding and using the subjects’ stories in their own words to really capture their experiences. Mainly because the generations that did not live through the Great Depression are very removed from the suffering and hardship that kind of financial collapse caused, knowing of it mostly through textbooks. Though textbooks don’t provide enough personal experience generally. By reading peoples personal experience it can create a better empathy from the reader, which I feel is huge in stories that involve social boundaries. When an author helps their audience empathize with their subject, the article has more  purpose. Their audience will be less likely to forget what they read if they connect and have a better understanding of  the story.Crowdsourcing is a huge tool to help authors create empathy for their readers, especially with how technology has made reaching out for sources very convenient and easy.

 

Also crowd sourcing allowed the author to provide a more in depth story. This allowed the author to provide a story that is based on actual experience and not assumptions from facts. Which contributes to richer context in such an article and a better perspective for their audience.By having people put forward their own stories the author not only got the added impact of their readers knowing that the story was coming from the mouth of someone who had lived it, but also was able to include small details that someone who had not lived through the Great Depression might not have thought to add. The author was clearly aiming to draw the reader in which authentic stories. While it was a good article, I feel like it was hurt by not having one strong voice. The author started the article with a mention protests and the spread of unionism, laid out some hard-hitting facts about unemployment and widespread poverty. They even used a story from a man who had been deeply involved in the labor movement. But instead of following through on their message, they switched to other story submissions that, while being an interesting look at the past, dropped the union message. They also chose to end the story with a story where the theme seemed to be that the younger generation doesn’t understand the value of money. I believe the article would have been more effective if they had both chosen their stories better and used more of their own material, perhaps drawing attention to current state of America’s unions.

Advertisements