Reflection (Practical 7)

If I was to create my own version of “Stomp” in relation to my research topic (Discuss the trends and developments on cyber counseling on youth):

How will I apply Citizen Journalism differently?  I'll set up a website like STOMP, letting the public contribute and collaborate. However, admins will help to filter out unnecessary or irrelevant information, hence there wouldn't be overflowing information.

Which criteria did you use to evaluate Stomp.com?

I evaluated STOMP based on its currency -how often it is being updated and its
coverage.


Why did you choose this criteria?


STOMP lives on the public, without public contribution and collaboration, STOMP would 
not sustain. There is a need for public to either post stories up or comment. Hence, by
looking at the currency, we get to know if the website is "alive". For example, people
are posting and commenting on STOMP everyday, therefore it shows that people like it
and STOMP will sustain. 
 

Next, since people visit STOMP frequently, it further shows that
they like it  and the coverage are interesting. 

In conclusion, by checking the currency and coverage, we can approximately know
its popularity and judge if it is sustainable.