I was preoccupied with helping out on our Super Bowl coverage last weekend so I'm only now catching up on what wiser folks than me have been writing about the failure of Bayosphere. The consensus seems to be that it was a good idea but poorly executed. While hardly an indictment of citizen journalism, it is an object lesson in what's needed to making a citJ (or CJ) effort work.

Tim Porter put it very succinctly:

I see three principles from the Bayosphere experience that are key for newspapers and other entities that hope to use citizen journalism as part or all of their business:

• Community can't be forced.
• Focus is foremost.
• Personality is a plus.

Online Journalism Review's Tom Grubisich opines that, although ostensibly a Bay Area community site, Bayosphere "never came close to living up to its mission. It was neither of, by nor for the Bay Area":

If there is any general lesson about Bayosphere, it's that citizen journalism at the community level needs less high-flown rhetoric and more street-smart testing. The model for what works in content remains to be finished. Citizen journalism is not a failure. But there needs to be a more engaged relationship between the proprietors and impresarios of community sites and their contributors, some of whom are news-gathering novices.

Meanwhile, back on Bayosphere itself, Craig Weiler covers similar ground in a post asking whether the citizen journalism model itself is viable:

Based on my experience, this is what's needed to succeed:

CJ's need to be seen on the pages most seen by visitors.

CJ's need encouragement and critique by staff.

CJ's need acknowledgement for work above and beyond.

In other words, a successful citizen journalism effort requires lots of time, patience, outreach, nurturing support, dedication and focus -- just like any other effort at organizing a community.