Should journalists keep independent from those they cover by remaining non-partisan and objective in essentially all they do? Most journalists would say yes. Phrases such as 'Journalism is a way of life,' and 'Its a sacrifice journalists make' frequently are heard when discussing independence. I think that independence is certainly necessary but what frustrates me is the clear hypocrisy shown by journalists. At the national, it is obvious that we have an abundance of opinion journalism and very little considerations for the independence of faction belief that journalists are supposed to have.
I am not at all convinced that bias, and the removal of it, is always in the mind of the journalist when they are writing or discussing a topic. But I believe wholeheartedly that it should be. There are many media that claim to be 'news sources' but there is an apparent bias in much of their reporting that worries me. Instead of watching the news and being able to form your own opinion, the opinion is being formed for you. What good does professing to be non-partisan and objective do when no one actually believes that you are?
I do not feel much sympathy towards most journalists on this issue (and I believe most of the pubic would agree) because they usually come off seeming self-righteous on top of their clear hypocrisy. The only true way to remedy this is for bias to be removed or balance to be restored to the media. Codes of conduct and professed objectivity are not going to cut it any more; we need to see results.The news media should not be hindering the viewers abilities to make opinions in the first place, yet sometimes it is clear that rather than reflecting public opinion it is creating it.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
Who Journalists Work For
A recent PEW research study shows that citizens are trusting the news press less and less. Similarly, I am sure that if you conducted a study and asked the public if they believed that journalists followed a code of conduct where their first loyalty is to the citizens, the participants would answer with a resounding no. I would also agree that I do not believe that journalists follow their supposed codes of conduct. While it is good to hear that such a thing exists, it is unfortunate and rather hypocritical for most citizens to feel like journalists do not actually follow it.
Journalists ARE in control of the news. So it is their own fault that citizens don't trust them. They incite fear and distrust more than anything else. The media will only mention stock numbers when they are low, they never mention them when the stock ended on a high. The media will report frightening statistics on deaths, but not hopeful statistics on crime. The news is not balanced. They feed off of trends similar to authors feeding on the vampire romance craze. The next presidential debate is more than a year away yet most of our news is consumed with following the lives of nominees. Rumors fly all around; questions such as "Is this person actually going to run for president?" are asked even when politicians have stated many times that they are not going to. Why waste news time to talk about ridiculous things like that? The news media is not trusted by citizens because they give no reason for citizens to trust them. If journalists truly believe they follow a code of conduct, then they should ACTUALLY FOLLOW IT and quit trying to simply get high ratings and profit.
Journalists ARE in control of the news. So it is their own fault that citizens don't trust them. They incite fear and distrust more than anything else. The media will only mention stock numbers when they are low, they never mention them when the stock ended on a high. The media will report frightening statistics on deaths, but not hopeful statistics on crime. The news is not balanced. They feed off of trends similar to authors feeding on the vampire romance craze. The next presidential debate is more than a year away yet most of our news is consumed with following the lives of nominees. Rumors fly all around; questions such as "Is this person actually going to run for president?" are asked even when politicians have stated many times that they are not going to. Why waste news time to talk about ridiculous things like that? The news media is not trusted by citizens because they give no reason for citizens to trust them. If journalists truly believe they follow a code of conduct, then they should ACTUALLY FOLLOW IT and quit trying to simply get high ratings and profit.
Pew Research Study
First, I have to say that I was disappointed that this NY Times article did not have a link to the actual study. It looked like it gave a link but if you actually follow it, it leads you to a general site. I am not sure what Pew qualifies as younger adults but Im sure that I would be considered to be one. I am the same as the younger adults in this survey in that I use the internet to get most of my news. I had an issue with the question where it asked younger adults if they would be concerned with the death of a local newspaper.
Personally, like the other younger adults, I would be more unconcerned if there was a death of a local newspaper but I believe that the author and the researchers were not correct in their explanation of why. The author relied on a researcher, Mr. Rosenstiel, on the project to help explain why younger adults would be less concerned. Mr. Rosenstiel said, the finding could be attributed to cognitive dissonance or to an assumption that the news and information would be available elsewhere if the newspaper were to close." I think that this is a real issue in some circumstances but I believe there is a better explanation for the lack of concern for local newspapers in this instance. Younger adults move around a lot. Often, they have not been in the same place for more than two or three years and they do not plan on staying where they are for the next two or three years. This lack of a stable 'home' in younger adult's lives is a better explanation for why they do not really care about local newspapers. I have lived in Provo for about a year and a half and the only local newspaper I have read is the university's paper. I don't really care that much about local Provo news because I do not consider myself to be a true local citizen. I believe that this example is a better reason for why young adults are not concerned about the death of a local newspaper. This NY Times article was interesting but I am not sure that it was entirely thought out.
Personally, like the other younger adults, I would be more unconcerned if there was a death of a local newspaper but I believe that the author and the researchers were not correct in their explanation of why. The author relied on a researcher, Mr. Rosenstiel, on the project to help explain why younger adults would be less concerned. Mr. Rosenstiel said, the finding could be attributed to cognitive dissonance or to an assumption that the news and information would be available elsewhere if the newspaper were to close." I think that this is a real issue in some circumstances but I believe there is a better explanation for the lack of concern for local newspapers in this instance. Younger adults move around a lot. Often, they have not been in the same place for more than two or three years and they do not plan on staying where they are for the next two or three years. This lack of a stable 'home' in younger adult's lives is a better explanation for why they do not really care about local newspapers. I have lived in Provo for about a year and a half and the only local newspaper I have read is the university's paper. I don't really care that much about local Provo news because I do not consider myself to be a true local citizen. I believe that this example is a better reason for why young adults are not concerned about the death of a local newspaper. This NY Times article was interesting but I am not sure that it was entirely thought out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)