Welcome, you guys! So let's get started. Check out this opinion piece by the always insightful David Carr of the New York Times. He opines on just how good the media is in reporting unsavory and controversial breaking news stories about themselves.
"Journalism’s Misdeeds Get a Glance in the Mirror." Read it and offer your comments on what YOU think. Post at least three sentences here by 11 a.m. next Tuesday, 28 Aug. Remember, this is commentary by a NY Times reporter. What's your own opinion?
It's a two sided sword when reporting corruption amongst journalists. On one side, we gain the reader's trust by telling the ugly truth. On the other, we reveal that this industry may not be as trustworthy as we hoped. I think the most difficult part would be the articles explaining the situation, because we couldn't put our own explanations, apologies, or opinions on this subject without risk of doing the reader another disservice by inflicting our personal opinions.
ReplyDeletePenning controversial articles about fellow journalists is extremely risky. It's honestly a lose-lose situation. You as a journalist have to ask yourself, "Do I remain unbiased and turn my back on a fellow journalist in order to reveal the truth or do I become biased and take their side because we work in the same field?" Weeding out all of the sources that aren't credible is the most logical thing to do for the sake of the readers, but the damage is already done. The readers aren't just questioning one source's credibility; they're questioning the profession as a whole, and that's where things get very tricky.
ReplyDeleteThis article really brings up an issue that is a catch-22. As a good journalist you want to report the truth , even though it will hurt someone in the long run, but then if it is about your fellow reporters/journalist you don't want to reveal some of the wrong doings that have gone on in that industry.This article does bring up a good point on how if it was any other industry like the bank or an oil company the press would be all over it, but since it is about journalist, then it was not so hectic. I think it is your job as a journalist to report the truth no matter what it is, it might hurt people in the near future, but in the long run it will help the industry as a whole become better.
ReplyDeleteMedia today is focusing too much on which news can have the story out there first. The public doesn't care that one newspaper got their online content up a few seconds before another. Journalists should stand for truth and justice, so it is our obligation to point out our own flaws due to careless mistakes made in a frenzy to put up the wrong content first. Even taking an extra half hour to wait for a source to call can make the difference in our credibility. Credibility is what the public seeks most in a media source. We can share photos and short video clips to start a story, to get content out soon. However, when it comes to the big details of the story, we need to take our time and report the truth.
ReplyDeleteThe only word to describe how I felt at the end of that article is hypocrisy. The media of todays world only focuses on issues that will light a fire under the public, and on a separate note why mention Blackwater? I'm sure very few people have legitimate knowledge about what Blackwater did for us. As journalists, yes...we are all considered hypocrites and the news by most people (including myself) is a one-sided affair, but news is news, no matter how the story goes.
ReplyDeleteMany journalists tend to be careless about mistakes because getting there story out, as fast as they can, is their main focus. Although that is their job, I believe some journalists need to focus on reporting strictly the facts they do KNOW because that in the end is what readers want. As a journalist, you would not want readers to loose your trust. If journalists have to change the light on a story then there loosing out on the beauty of a true journalist. Journalists that look deep into an issue and are still able to make a story big, without twisting the issue, then that to me is the ideal journalist anyone would aspire to be.
ReplyDeleteI haven't really put that much thought into myself being a journalist, to discover the "cold, hard facts" that the public desperately wants to see. However, from this article, I would say that, in order to gain street credit from the people we claim to speak out for, reporting news that is correct and complete would start to fix the damage we have done to the journalism industry. We shouldn't be fighting over the newest and most crucial stories, like dogs with a bone. In order for people to come to terms that journalists do not simply exist to take snapshots of private moments, like when gymnast Jordan Wieber cried at the London Olympics this summer, or dig up truths that are only partially true, we should focus on the quality of our work and we need to be ethically sound in our reporting.
ReplyDeleteInsightful as I found the piece to be, i feel ax if this particular issue has been the basis of ALL journalism whether it be here or in another country. It mentioned the web raising the pressure on journalists to report fast and first being as to how many media venues there are out these days but should still if need be by an employer, or individual ethics committee or something of the sort, I feel that all printed news material should be subject to thorough credibility checks. A mistake of these proportions that is actually focused on the media and there questionable methods I would immediately expect to be swept under the rug as it was, but the part that is confusing for me is that how something so official, and responsible for getting the "right info" to so many citizens could just blatantly misinform the public when its their job to do the very opposite.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what most of the article is saying. Only because it seems that I live my life on social media network sites. Newspapers or news organizations are too focused on being "seen" instead of being thorough or have some ethics for themselves. Journalists want to be the first want to break a story but the percentage rates of being inaccurate is extremely high for people in the business and future ones to come into the business.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I do not know much about newspapers or news organizations in the UK, I wouldn't doubt that they are any different than the US when it comes to credibility. I think that journalists should focus more on the truth and credibility of their stories because in the end, it's them and their company that will receive the inevitable downfall for writing a story with false remarks. I think that news organization CEOs should run credibility checks on every journalist's story. I don't think that "cozying up to the sources" is necessarily a bad thing either. I think that journalism can be a "dog-eat-dog" business and to find the truth/information for a story you have to work for it.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that 66% of people think most articles are partialy fabricated says enough. Journalism has become something that it was not meant to be when created. It was created to solely give the public facts and information about what was going on around them. It was also made to keep people informed in a timely fashion. But, truth is more important than speed. That is what it boils down to. No matter what, information should be non-biased and truthful before publicized.
ReplyDeleteI think because of peoples jobs being on the line because of the economy more people have become carless about the type of work they are putting out. Their focused more on meeting a deadline and getting the news out there first that they aren't focusing on the quality of work they are doing. I also think that the journalism world has become more "cut throat" and in some circumstances journalist feel like you have to do what you have to do even if it means being false at least you got your companies article out 12 seconds before your competitor. Some journalists are losing sight of what it means to be a good, truthful journalist and it's starting to affect how the public views journalism as a whole.
ReplyDeleteI find it interesting that this article is written in a time when businesses and banks are accused and found guilty of fraud. The attitude held by the bankers and ceos that allows those in control to fool the public has fallen to the media. Although what has happened is terrible for our western culture, I am relieved to know that someone had the courage to expose and write about it.
ReplyDeleteI agree wholeheartedly with Carr that the press machine is broken. "Cozying up to sources" is a great way to phrase a problem that has been addressed, but not solved. ESPN praises Boston sports teams more than anywhere else. They also just so happen to have countless former Patriots, Red Sox, and Celtics working for the network in some capacity as well as former employees coaching the Celtics and Patriots. Fox News did not hit very hard on Newt Gingrich during his campaign for president. Why? It could be because Gingrich was a correspondent for the network. Skip Bayless, formerly of the Dallas Morning News, said that he often coddles athletes because he gets too close to them personally.
ReplyDeleteThe ethics behind how far you should go to get a scoop, needs to find boundaries. Michael Gallagher stepped out of line with how he researched the Chiquita story. Phone-tapping and invasion of privacy are not valid ways to get news. Something will have to be fixed if the public is ever going to respect the media like they did when it was George Seldes and I.F. Stone telling us the news.
It is controversial for a journalist to display their opinion about other journalists and what they have done. There is no reason for information about journalism cases to be kept a secret they should just not be revealed by other journalists. It is necessary for journalists to explain the news truthfully, but not in a way that puts down other journalists because it gives journalism as a whole a bad name.
ReplyDelete