The twisted truths in objective journalism

Michael Bugeja, who teaches journalism at Iowa State describes objectivity very aptly:
“Objectivity is seeing the world as it is, not how you wish it were.”
It has been said that Public Relations have rattled the world of objective journalism, where official sources have ubiquitously provided reporters with polished and shaped words that have had their real definition sucked out. Words like ‘climate change’, as opposed to ‘global warming’, ‘conservationist’ instead of ‘environmentalist’. The point I’d like to raise here, is that many reporters have succumbed to become passive writers of news, preferring to not cut through this kind of manipulation for fear of being perceived as bias. The nonstop news cycle has left reporters with less time to dig and thus develop an over reliance on official sources.

Notwithstanding the plausible notion of ‘fairness’ in reporting and how objectivity can protect journalists from the consequences of what they write, Cunningham argues how it can make “reporters hesitant to inject issues into the news that aren’t already out there’ (2003, p.3). For as much as we want to assume the role of society’s watchdogs, we have to re-evaluate the limitations and definitions of objectivity, to search for a way that is less restrictive and more grounded in reality.

Would you as an aspiring journalist, upon discovering a problem, be inclined to report extensively about it, develop an understanding, and reach conclusions, even when no official sources are speaking out about it? I believe that more can be done to release reporters into becoming analysts, trained not to write with a dull mind, offering only two sides of the story. Reporters should indeed call it as they see it, and be fearless about digging towards a deeper understanding of some things.

References:

Cunningham. B., 2003, Re-thinking Objectivity, Columbia Journalism Review, [online],  available at <http://ruby.fgcu.edu/courses/tdugas/IDS3301/acrobat/objectivity.pdf>, accessed on 15 July 2011.

The Clash Between Privacy Laws and the Freedom of the Press: Celebrities

WEEK 7: PRIVACY (BUT I’M A CELEBRITY TOO…)

Celebrities are often caught up in a furor over the reality of their daily lives being invaded by the paparazzi. What do you think? Is it silly for celebrities to be upset when their fame might be a result of them putting themselves out there in the first place? One should also consider how some actors do not desire the limelight at all, and are driven by passion to simply succeed in their profession. After which, a lucky break in the Hollywood scene can draw the best lot of tabloid photographers to their doorstep in a heart beat.

Many judges often face the free speech-versus-media-intrusion dilemma. The paparazzi often uses the news gathering and news worthiness defenses to protect their actions, while the position of celebrities in society encourages such invasions. In actual fact, celebrities are entitled to the same general right of privacy that extends to all individuals. However, the degree to which that right is protected is much narrower for public figures.

In my humble opinion, the justifications for that smaller degree, although hardly flawless, can be broadly accepted.

One of the justifications is that because the personalities and affairs of celebrities are viewed as ‘inherently’ public, these waive off their rights to privacy. Yet as Nordhaus stresses, this waiver should be limited to the press only examining and exposing information that has some bearing on the individual’s position in society.

 

Lets question the #deathofjournalism

Week 6: We’re all a Twitter (Journalism & Its Negotiation of New Media)

This week’s presentation discussed the role of new media in journalism, with a main focus on a debate thats dates nearly six years back. The conflict between bloggers and journalists– One could come up with, and prove how either side is more credible and professional, more personal, or perhaps far more independent and original. But as I echo media blogger Jay Rosen’s sentiments about how the issue is simply not about whether blogs can be considered journalism, I half contest the conclusion put forward at the end of the presentation, that bloggers cannot be considered journalists. They can be! Sometimes.

Journalism cannot be identified exclusively with journalists. What then do you consider a blogger who searches an existing record of fact, only to find that a public figure’s claim is false?

In light of a commercialised press, the audience (or the public) are starting to put more trust in blogs that challenge the notion of hard news without an opinion and a voice, and which sometimes fail to deliver updates as quickly as social media can. Even journalists like John Schwartz of the New York Times, Dec. 28 admitted: ”For vivid reporting from the enormous zone of tsunami disaster , it was hard to beat the blogs.” As a journalism student, I have often wondered about the necessity of keeping such an important eye open for objectivity. I have been taught to write news without an opinion or in other words, without any ounce of bias, and with a lot of detachment. And this particular rigid discipline of journalism is what makes the blood of editors boil, as they discuss how bloggers’ writings are made up of mostly whingeing and biased opinions.

However, I would like to point us to another perspective offered by Geneva Overholser, from the Missouri School of Journalism. He said:

The way it is currently construed, “objectivity” makes the media easily manipulable by an executive branch intent on and adept at controlling the message. It produces a rigid orthodoxy, excluding voices beyond the narrowly conventional.

The fact lies in that many readers also do not buy the old credibility descriptions of the mainstream press anymore. The notion of a neutral, non-partisan mainstream press is but quite dead to many. To end, I’d like to emphasise on how the issue should not be about whether bloggers are real journalists or not. Many bloggers do not claim to replace journalism, and just as how many journalists are now keeping a blog, there is a strong call for the two to work together.

References:

Rosen, Jay. (2005) Bloggers vs. Journalists is over. PressThink [blog] Jan 21, Available at <http://archive.pressthink.org/2005/01/21/berk_essy.html> [Accessed on 9 June 2011 ]

Rosen, Jay. (2011) The twisted psychology of bloggers vs journalists: my talk at south by southwest. PressThink. [blog] March 12, Available at <http://pressthink.org/2011/03/the-psychology-of-bloggers-vs-journalists-my-talk-at-south-by-southwest/> [Accessed on 9 June 2011]

Journalistic Integrity Affected In Today’s Global Village

Week 5: Globalisation vs . Localisation

The issue of globalisation and its effect on local news around the world is a very real issue in journalism today. Vanessa and Laura presented this week’s seminar to us, and brought up an important aspect regarding the effects of globalisation on journalism.

I quote this from their presentation: Journalists place commercial aspects before the public’s right to know.

The emergence of the global village has not only evolved technology use for the good of media development, it has also brought an onslaught of commercial considerations that taint the news agenda in the global and national media. A particular example of this can be found in how editors of a publication can find themselves compromising content for commercial considerations. Large companies are likely to pay publications to write puffed up articles about the good of them, in return for a huge fee.

I am led to believe that newspaper publications will become more vulnerable to commercial pressures as time advances. An official annual report on American Journalism (State of the Media, 2011) revealed that newspapers in the United States are suffering more severely than those anywhere in the world. Advertising makes up a large percentage of newspaper funding, with U.S. reporting a 73% in advertising of total revenues. But because print newspapers have been losing their advertisers to Internet companies, they are fighting a hard battle to keep them. And that might just mean that the fight to attract and keep newspaper advertisers will increasingly hamper and influence editorial judgment.

Robert Picard, media economist and director of research at the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at the University of Oxford, says that print newspapers “are still growing” in most developing countries. Yet, the Nigerian press has been examined to reveal a lot of corruption, to such a degree that many “big advertisers are protected from critical reporting or are actually able to influence news content” (Alyetan, 2011). Hence, he recommends that journalists can redeem their profession with the help of new models of watchdog journalism such as non-profit centers and research organisations.

At a time where many news agencies have their hands tied when it comes to dollars and cents, journalists must be aware of whose agenda they’re pushing for, as well as strengthen their resolve and integrity to serve the public’s right to know.

 

References:

Alyetan, D. (2011). Combating Corruption in Nigeria: The Promise of Investigative Reporting. [online] Washington, DC: National Endowment for Democracy. Available at: [Accessed on 3rd June 2011]

Houston Santhanam, L. and Rosenstiel,T. (2011) Annual report 2011. Why U.S. Newspapers suffer more than others. [online] Available at: [Accessed on 3rd June 2011]

Paying for it

Week 4: Who will pay for journalism? Is it just about money?

The presenters for this week’s seminar introduced the issue of paying for journalism, and what or who are it’s monetary drivers. Their consensus was the same as Warren’s (2010), whom they quoted as having said this: They (newspapers) depend on advertising clients to make profit. In addition, they also concluded how journalism is not all about money. As we consider printing costs of papers and broadcasting equipment, even the cost of a journalism university education, it is entirely realistic to view journalism as some sort of a business model. Money cannot be detracted in the making of this model.

Perhaps one needs to empathise with the common journalist/ editor who gets caught between soliciting money and investors, and publishing stories. It is not unheard of, that journalists have succumbed to this constant struggle. Jason also pointed out how the editorial process often goes beyond journalistic sensibilities. In light of this, reporters need to hold onto their integrity, and maintain a level of top quality in journalism.

From their presentation, I learnt that besides the typical advertising client, the government and commercial news media corporations also invest and pay for journalism. It surprised me to learn how in the U.S., the government provide many grants to student journalists. Ultimately, I believe that it will be the readers themselves who will keep paying for quality journalism. In this sense, they will gladly pay for accountability and authority on a subject.

Whatever the merits of citizen journalism and social media, one cannot deny how we have to pay for the good stuff.

Some questions I am pondering over though.. If journalism as a business model should fail, what replaces it? Who then pays for what replaces it?

References: Warren, C., 2010, The Future of Journalism, Life in the clickstream II, Our Audience, P32-33, viewed on 23^th of May, The Sydney Morning Herald, Australia.

“For the people, by the people”

Week 3: Journalism as a Public conversation in the 21^st century; what is the role of the citizen?

The role of citizen reporting in the future of journalism seems to be a growing one. From where major news organisations around the world tended to monopolise the release of breaking news stories, the Internet has revolutionised this process, creating a platform for ordinary people to upload first hand news reports. British journalism saw a landmark for the emergence of citizen journalism in 2005, where locals made extensive coverage reports regarding the London bombings. With newspapers also declining in popularity among many youths, many turn to online news sites and blogs, and even citizen journalism  sites to keep abreast of news.

Even television broadcasters lose out to the Internet as people go online for updates on breaking news. No doubt that news companies are all online as well, constructing websites to make their stories available, even creating Twitter accounts to provide readers with live feed updates. But my strong belief lies in how traditional media should co-exist with citizen journalism to ensure that news do not simply serve the government’s agenda, but also enlarge the voice of the community.

Nicholas Lehmann (2007) in the New Yorker Magazine professed his absolute belief that the two media forms need each other. In his opinion, the role of citizen journalists is to “correct the flaws in the conversation”, whilst traditional media conduct the conversation and set the agenda. No doubt that a large portion of the audience places more trust in traditional media, perceiving newspapers as a more credible news source. This could be attributed to how journalism has evolved into a profession, and authoritative sources like politicians, and business leaders provide regular information in their expert field. However, much of journalism nowadays lack a personal touch. Citizen journalism thus provides an avenue for the community to engage with news on a much more personal basis, even providing coverage on controversial topics that will not be published in government newspapers.

The most recognised citizen journalism blog in Singapore is perhaps STOMP. Many youths and adults alike go to the blog for news stories one won’t be likely to read in the Strait Times. But I noticed how most stories are lacking in news worthiness, structure, and are largely about info-tainment. Perhaps the best element in the stories posted there are the numerable pictures that Singaporeans upload through their mobile phones. Overall, I should think the essence of citizen reporting is there, but one cannot look to STOMP as a credible alternative news source. Left to citizen reporters alone, many are unable to churn out news stories that are of considerable quality.

As I’ve mentioned before, news organisations can work with citizen reporters like you and I to help us in our news delivery.

I came across how social media giant YouTube is connecting news organisations to citizen reporters around the world through this platform called YouTube Direct. Watch the video for more information on this!