Be careful that you're not going to descend into LuntzSpeak.  I think that "Citizen Media" is good enough without making any comparisons to the Dark Side.  "Crowd Powered Media" is a little evocative of the mindless Mob whereas "Citizen" echoes the idea of reponsibility.

What needs to be emphasised is that the news posted here is what people really care about, not what Big Media (and all its vested interests) tells us we should care about.

Therefore, a good title/tagline/slogan might be something along the lines of - "Citizen Powered Media - the news people care about" 

Just my two pen'orth.

No need nor any motivation for NP to raise the spectre of the darkside. In fact, have a look at this Associated Press news article which quotes NowPublic CEO Leonard Brody: 

NowPublic intended to be a resource, not a substitute, for professional news reporters, according to Brody.

"Our job is to provide an army of people who are eyes and ears that journalists can build around," Brody said.

"Telling someone they are going to be a citizen journalist is like telling them they are going to be a citizen dentist; it requires training and the average person just can't do it."

Thanks, that clarifies the focus of this site.  I was wondering why so much of the news on here had already been reported by someone else.

 However, this ...

"Telling someone they are going to be a citizen journalist is like
telling them they are going to be a citizen dentist; it requires
training and the average person just can't do it.

... is totally the wrong analogy.  Taking some pictures of, and writing about, something that happened are not the same as invading someone's mouth with a diamond tipped drill.  I resent this allusion to the 'average person' as somehow being not capable.  And who decides what an 'average person' is anyway?

Yes you are right, that taking some pictures of, and writing about, something that happened are
not the same as invading someone's mouth with a diamond tipped drill. 

Precisely! Anyone can take a photo of something that is happening that matters to them. With NowPublic, we are providing the tools so that these experiences can be turned into a meaningful form of communication - and appreciated by hundreds of thousands of others.

Moonwolf, NowPublic is definitely a work in progress. The very character of it changes with each new energetic contributor. For example, today I spent all day working on one story - never done that before!  We're all learning and I'm happy to have you onboard pushing for what you believe in.

Moonwolf good to know we're still on track!

I'm not sure if anyone witnessed the firestorm at the LA Times recently.  They ran an op ed about citizen journalism that has been an utter embarassment to the paper.  I posted something about it the other day.

as long as the crowd are adding new information or perspectives. Otherwise its just republishing and has no real validity over mainstream media, which is being copied.

One thing I believe citizen-mediated media on a world wide network would be its inherent possibility to give everyone access to the exact sources the original creator had at the time.

 I believe many are aware of wikipedia's rather glaring recognition in schools, but luckily, there exists history functions, to which a date of retrieval should clear.

 But that's not all, for the same issue is present lightly in other, non crowded sources of information.

 What really sticks out in NowPublic is the one idea that was not inherently present in other sources of media, one that, for my latest article, I explored - the ability to have interviews open to the public for all to listen to, and from that, verify that your interpetation is correct; as opposed, to, out of context.

 I really would like to see more of this on Now Public; unfotunately, until I get Fido Five Plan, it's just too expensive for me to pioneer it on my own, especially with surveys.