What I found most interesting in this week’s prep materials was the revolutionary nature of open source investigations due to their widespread accessibility. Anyone can become an “accidental journalist,” as described in the Bellingcat documentary, if they happen to digitally capture instances of interest. Further, interested volunteers can use those sources as the basis of their investigation – an investigation that can be conducted in that volunteer’s home anywhere in the world. In venturing away from the typical newsroom, open source journalism not only permits an ease of entry that has been historically absent but also allows volunteers from all around the world to collaborate on stories. However, this accessibility also holds innate challenges that are not as abundant in traditional modes of journalism. Accurate evidence, in this context, becomes more necessary as independent, volunteer journalists do not have the credibility of a known, verified outlet behind them. Additionally, as the documentary makes abundantly clear, footage is easy to forge and propagate as factual. Truth and evidence, therefore, become even more crucial commodities.
Open source journalism not only serves as a typical fourth estate ‘watchdog’ entity but also as a mechanism for human rights accountability. This dual usage is evident through Human Rights Watch’s use of the method for their cases. Serving essentially as discovery would for a legal case, this type of investigative reporting can be used to source evidence of human rights violations from foreign actors in a way that was never possible prior to widespread and instantaneous access to footage of practically anything at any time. A Bellingcat reporter emphasizes this point, commenting that there are more hours of the Syrian Civil War online than hours in the conflict itself. The Defense Blog describes this accountability utility as “reveal[ing] the fog of war.” However, the documentary also makes clear that, while the overwhelming documentation of any event anywhere in the world is lauded as an “information revolution,” it can easily descend into “information warfare.” The film stresses that humans don’t want to fact-check any information that contradicts their worldview. Therefore, with an abundance of truthful and false/misleading information so quickly accessible, it becomes easier to live in an echo chamber – trusting sources that confirm existing beliefs or biases without bothering to verify any of this information. In reading these sources and witnessing the power of open-source investigative journalism, I was in awe of the talent and dedication of these citizen journalists. However, when watching the documentary, I was struck by how this tool for accountability, brought about by the accessible and ubiquitous nature of the internet, can also be so quickly used for sowing distrust in truth and creating misleading content for clicks. How do we, as an audience and as aspiring journalists, reckon with the dual power of the internet? Further, how do we ensure that we continue to find truth within an online landscape increasingly dominated by artificial intelligence and other technological advances?
