Sound familiar?
Journalism gets a tough rap from many people in main stream society. Heated discussions about how well (or how terribly) journalism is fulfilling its roles frequently occur on talk shows, on the Internet, in newspapers, and in conversation. Many complain that journalism is too negative, journalists are too dishonest, and media is too unreliable.
I disagree.
The problem is people do not understand what journalism is. It is not meant solely to broadcast the negative in the world. They have a false notion of journalism based on a stereotype that a few "bad journalists" created for everyone many years ago.
So, what is journalism?
I am not satisfied with Wikipedia's definition of journalism (found here) that says journalism is "the practice of investigation and reporting of events, issues, and trends to a broad audience in a timely fashion." This definition may be technically correct, but journalism goes much deeper than this. To me journalism is a source of empowerment; a way to join community and democracy.
I like the description of journalism found in the textbook "Converging Media" by John Pavlik and Shawn McIntosh. It says: "Journalisms purpose, according to some journalists, is to 'comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.'" Based on this definition, journalism's role is noble rather than destructive. The book also says the role and responsibility of journalism is
- as government watchdog
- as advocate of the common citizen
- as panderer to baser tastes among the public
- as big business
- as influencer of public opinion
"The Elements of Journalism" provides a few other definitions that I feel are worth sharing.
- The central purpose of journalism is to tell the truth so that people will have the information that they need to be sovereign.
- The goal is to serve the general welfare by informing the people.
- To give voices to people who need the the voice. . . people who are powerless
What do you think? What is journalism to you?
No comments:
Post a Comment