My (Freedom of Expression’s) very first entry, “Blogs self-regulate to stay credible,” pointed out that bloggers have a vested interest in being honest if they want to build and maintain an audience.

But when money is involved, it seems bloggers might need something more than mere self-policing.

Someone identified as “Johntw” posted a bogus story October 3 saying Apple CEO and founder Steve Jobs had suffered a heart attack, sending the company’s shares plunging more than 10 percent before Apple could quash the rumors.

The story appeared on CNN’s iReport, which some, such as TechNewsWorld’s Renay San Miguel, believe helped add to its credibility. Yet CNN only requires a valid e-mail address in order to post, and the only other information it can now provide to investigators at the Securities and Exchange Commission is the sender’s IP address.

If “Johntw” was doing some day trading on Wall Street, it is estimated he/she could have netted as much as $21 million by buying up Apple’s temporarily devalued shares with the knowledge that they would go right back up once the truth was exposed.

San Miguel, as a former CNN anchor, predicts that because of the Apple fiasco, the staff at iReport will now be vetting all submissions from the public.

“It may be a hassle and colossal time-suck to do it, and the company certainly won’t make a big deal about it, but it will do it. Because in the end, the people in charge of the network really do care about credibility,” he says.

Where do you think the line should be drawn? Can the blogosphere be a self-regulated news source or should measures be put in place to prevent people from exploiting its free-wheeling nature?

In 2007 CNN began inviting its viewers to send in their reports for possible broadcast; the response was overwhelming. The network’s iReport.com Web site, launched February 2008, now makes every submission – more than 100,000 so far – available for view or comment.

Unless the material will be broadcast on CNN or CNN.com, the network completely absolves itself of responsibility for the online collection of “unedited, unfiltered news.” Basically, the network trusts its iReport.com audience to decide for itself what is accurate.

“Don’t kid yourselves. This content is not pre-vetted or pre-read by CNN. This is your platform. In some journalistic circles, this is considered disruptive, even controversial! But we know the news universe is changing. We know that even here, at CNN, we can’t be everywhere, all the time following all the stories you care about. So, we give you iReport.com. You will program it, you will police it; you will decide what’s important, what’s interesting, what’s news,” says the site moderator, adding her hope that the site will raise the bar on user-generated material beyond the “dancing monkeys and cute cats and dogs” found elsewhere.

However, the site does have its share of pet tricks, weddings and school reports, and observers may very well wonder what the real value is, and what separates iReport from, say, YouTube.

That’s why the “Need Help?” section on the lower left column is interesting. Its advice on what makes a good story or how to take a good photograph or video is very basic, not intimidating and seems perfect for a younger person who is just testing the journalism waters.

So there is a special value to iReport.com when you consider that amateur reporters, who are producing material to get it distributed on one of the world’s largest networks, are learning about and paying closer attention to journalism standards – thorough, accurate and original reporting – than they otherwise might have.

Have you submitted any “citizen journalism” reports? If so, why?