This week’s class looked at independence and journalism. I really appreciated the way that the presenters looked at why an opinion writer is still a journalist, unlike (most of the time) a blog writer. They pointed out that, while opinion journalists are blunt about their opinions and take an obvious stand on an issue, they still do report on the topic through research and verification of facts. Therefore, opinion journalists should still be respected the way any journalist is. They work hard at what they do and bring to society a widely enjoyed and oft times favored part of one’s daily newspaper.
Another point brought up was whether or not one ought to reveal their beliefs to their audience. The question was raised: is it a journalist’s duty to reveal their personal beliefs to their audience? An interesting point of view is presented in the article found at http://www.ajr.org/article.asp?id=4073. Here a quote by former Philadelphia Inquirer Executive Editor President James M. Naughton is shared: “If you go buy a car, you don’t care how they made it. You care whether it’s safe and attractive and maybe whether it gets good gas mileage. We used to feel it was self-indulgent to focus on how a story gets done.” And perhaps, Mr. Naughton, it is self-indulgence. I, however, would argue that sometimes self-indulgence is acceptable. May I refer to the part of the quote that states: “you care whether it’s safe and attractive.” The issue, in my opinion, with this stance is that there are countless brilliant journalists out there that can make even the most ludicrous information appear “safe and attractive.” A few weeks ago, we discussed the issue between realism and reality. Readers know what they want to read and it is easy for a talented writer to give them just that, which is safe. Embellished or intelligent writing is good, but when used inappropriately, attractive is all it is. It’s like a boyfriend (or girlfriend)– sure, it’s great when he’s attractive. But, there’s got to be something underneath those chiseled biceps and sparkling eyes. Same thing goes with the news story – if a journalist can make their story attractive, that is a wonderful talent and it should be recognized. Within that pretty language, however, there should be a good story with meaning and truth.
Relating this back to independence and informing one’s readers of their views, I think that writer’s should inform their readers of their backgrounds, beliefs, and motives, but only to a reasonable extent. No, we do not care if you prefer blue shirts because they make your eyes stand out or if your favorite fruit is pears. We do care, however, if you are being funded by another organization to take a certain stance. An article at http://cursor.org/about/themoney.php says that “Media Transparency is the most complete resource available for providing research data and information about the money behind the conservative movement.” While this article is in specific reference to a certain movement, I believe it applies elsewhere as well. If a journalist is being funded by a specific party or faction, they will write as such, and their readers deserve to know this. Citizens are not dumb – they know that it is impossible to be completely unbiased and therefore everything they read will have a bias of some sort. Likewise, we discussed the issue of things like religious pieces – say, a Mormon writing an article on Mormons. Yes, the author should reveal their religion. This should be considered a good thing, though. Clearly, a Mormon would be more accurate about Mormons than a non-Mormon would. They probably will have some element of a bias in there, as any human being would, but as a professional they would be able to cover the story in a way that gives the readers accurate information from both sides of the story through things such as interviews from multiple sources.
No comments:
Post a Comment