Select issues with new media theories of citizen journalism

New Media theorists such as Dan Gillmor, Henry Jenkins, Jay Rosen and Jeff Howe have recently touted Citizen Journalism (CJ) as the latest innovation in 21st century journalism. 'Participatory journalism' and 'user-driven journalism' are other terms to describe CJ, which its proponents argue is a disruptive innovation (Christensen) to the agenda-setting media institutions, news values and 'objective' reportage. In this essay I offer a 'contrarian' view, informed by two perspectives: (1) a three-stage model of theory-building (Carlile & Christensen) to evaluate the claims made about CJ; and (2) self-reflexive research insights (Etherington) from editing the US-based news site Disinformation between November 1999 and February 2008. New media theories can potentially create 'cognitive dissonance' (Festinger) when their explanations of CJ practices are compared with what actually happens (Feyerabend). First I summarise Carlile & Christensen's model and the dangers of 'bad theory' (Ghoshal). Next I consider several problems in new media theories about CJ: the notion of 'citizen', new media populism, parallels in event-driven and civic journalism, and mergers and acquisitions. Two 'self-reflexive' issues are considered: 'pro-ams' or 'professional amateurs' as a challenge to professional journalists, and CJ's deployment in new media operations and production environments. Finally, some exploratory questions are offered for future researchers.