Position Paper...Again... :P
Well, slowly but surely the paper on journalism ethics is coming along. I edited the last draft I posted, and would like to thank everyone that read it and provided feedback...here is the newly edited version....any concrit is appreciated, but I know many of you are probably sick of seeing it! lol
Modern Journalism: What Went Wrong
The news has always played an important role in American society. Freedom of the press is guaranteed to all Americans in the Constitution, and news corporations take full advantage of that right on a daily basis. However, like most constitutional rights, freedom of the press is subject to exploitation. As time progresses, more and more superficial elements begin to affect the quality and credibility of American journalism. Now, the line between news and entertainment has become blurred and as a result the credibility of American journalism is in sharp decline.
Before one can determine the problems surrounding modern news one must first define the word "news" itself. The purpose of news is to inform, therefore it can be argued that news is anything that the public ought to know. Jack Fuller, publisher of the Chicago Tribune and winner of a Pulitzer Prize, theorizes, "One might be tempted to say that news is anything that news organizations report" (752). This presents the problem of determining which news sources to trust. It is naive to assume that everything reported in the paper or on television is the unbiased, unadulterated truth. It is the public’s responsibility to be critical of the press because this criticism forces news organizations to be more thorough, accurate and reliable. Jim Squires, who used to work as the editor of the Chicago Tribune, believes, "American[...]journalism once had as its goal a quest for accuracy and perspective that would eventually produce truth" (767). That goal has now become a quest, not for accuracy and truth, but for entertainment value and marketability.
Many people simply do not trust the news media. The problems regarding modern journalism cannot be attributed to one dominant cause because a variety of different components are responsible. H. Eugene Goodwin, author of Groping For Ethics In Journalism and former director of the Penn State School of Journalism, attributes this mistrust to the fact that "[...]gossip, the long-lasting antithesis of news, has wormed its way into the respectable columns of some...leading papers," making it difficult for the public to distinguish between tabloid journalism and real news (45). This line between entertainment and journalism is further blurred when celebrities, such as Chris Matthews and Jon Stewart, host "news programs" that serve no other purpose than to allow them to express their personal opinions regarding current events. Popular companies provide corporate sponsorship for news organizations in hopes of broadening their target audience and raising revenue. The need for public appeal ties in directly with the celebrity and corporate endorsement of news stations. Catchy jingles, flashy graphics, and opinionated news anchors are also a direct result of the public’s declining attention span. News organizations are pressured to make news segments shorter and more controversial in order to hold the public’s attention, ultimately leading to a lack of depth and reliability in news coverage. Changing American values can also be attributed with influencing modern journalism; "[...now] the best ‘news’ combines sex and crime and prominent people" (Squires 769).
Ideally, a reporter conveys information to the public in an unbiased, fair and truthful manner by withholding personal judgement and allowing people to come to their own conclusions regarding any particular issue. Reporters and news anchors are not supposed to solve conflicts or offer resolution; they are there to convey information to the public, plain and simple. According to William Henry, author of What’s News: The Media In American Society, "[...]pushing reporters to see themselves as avengers and persuading the audience to expect a champion rather than a tutor" leads to ineffective journalism because the journalist’s role has become skewed (147). Henry observes that most news anchors are not hired for their integrity or professionalism, but rather for their "[...]ability to make scripted chitchat sound like ad libs" (156). Because of the public’s misapprehension regarding a journalist’s true role reporters can have a huge effect on whatever story they are reporting. For example, if a popular news anchor, such as Dan Rather or Barbara Walters, is reporting on a story, then that story automatically becomes important in the eyes of the public. Jeffery Olen, author of Ethics In Journalism, believes that there is a good deal of strategy behind deciding which news anchor reports each story. "How anchors are used affects the perception of the viewers...when anchors leave their New York studios to originate evening news broadcasts at the site of some developing story, the importance of that story is magnified in the viewers’ minds" (120). Aside from the reporter’s presence alone, the tone in which they deliver a story also has a great deal of impact on the viewer’s perception. Elements such as sarcasm allow the reporter to take a clear stand on one side of an issue or another without overtly stating their position.
Money and fame, two elements that are synonymous with corruption, have also found a place in modern journalism. Most reporters’ priorities are shifting from producing honest and accurate news to producing controversial and marketable news. In the article "Sneer When You Say ‘Journalist’" Michael D’Antonio, a reporter for the Los Angeles Times, states that, "The humility that once guided many journalists- you were never bigger than the story- was replaced by the rush to become noticed" (4). D’Antonio also discusses some of the recent scandals regarding fraudulent reporting. Reporter Jayson Blair was fired from the New York Times for filling article after article with lies, and reporter Janet Cooke resigned after receiving the Pulitzer Prize for an article that turned out to be complete fiction (D’Antonio 1-2). With scandals such as these becoming more common in modern journalism, it is no surprise that the public is questioning the integrity of the profession.
Advertising plays a major role in journalism today. Advertisers directly fund news organizations through print ads, commercials and pamphlets. In turn, the public indirectly funds the news organizations through the purchase of the products advertised. Goodwin states that, "[...]the media get most of their profits not directly from the consumer or the public, but indirectly through advertising" (31). Just as the public’s funding of news organizations is indirect, so are some of the influences that advertisers have on modern journalism. In most cases, advertisers do not directly dictate what is or is not reported upon but factors such as product placement and which products a particular news organization supports does have an influence on public perception. "Some advertisers seek preferential treatment in the news media in which they buy [specific] advertising space and time" (Goodwin 46). This does not directly influence the news, but the products being advertised could have an influence on the public’s understanding of an issue. For example, if an article about a pro-life protest is right next to an ad for an abortion clinic, than it would be reasonable for the reader to assume that the paper supports pro-choice viewpoints. Some advertisers are more aggressive and "[...]try to influence the selection and play of news[...]by threatening to cancel or actually cancelling their ads" (Goodwin 48). Although this scare tactic may not work on larger news corporations, local organizations many not be financially stable enough to loose advertising. In addition, what a news organization chooses to report is heavily dependent on advertising. To be successful in the news business, one does not necessarily need honest and thorough reporting, but rather, "[...]an audience that at least some advertisers want or need to reach" (Goodwin 32). A news organization’s main audience is not the pubic but rather the advertisers that are trying to reach the public. "Some newspapers are abandoning their democratic traditions of trying to appeal to everyone[...]and are seeking more affluent audiences better able to respond to advertising" (Goodwin 32).
Television, although it cannot be completely blamed for the problems surrounding journalism, has often had an adverse affect on the profession. Journalism in its most raw form represents the truth. When presenting that truth to the public the main focus should be that story. Special effects have taken away from the integrity of journalism by shifting the public’s focus from the actual story to the superficial way in which it is being presented. Cheesy music, urgent captions, and flashy colors seem to accompany each individual news segment shown on T.V. Michael Epstein, the director of the National Entertainment and Media Law Institute, believes that "Virtually all the networks have allowed the artistic potential of post-production effects to erode their journalistic credibility" (1). Another problem regarding television news is determining whether a story is being reported because it is informative or because it is entertaining. For example, Fox News did a special hour-long report with psychic John Edwards to discuss whether or not there was an afterlife (1). It is impossible to take a news organization seriously when their "special reports" consist of material that would be more appropriate for the Sci-Fi Network than a seemingly respectable news channel. Television has also tainted news in the respect that a thorough story has become less important than a fast story. "Breaking news" is a term used by many of the major networks who seem to have cameras and reporters live on the scene of any event within minuets. These reporters are shown tensely standing by with serious expressions and furrowed brows, ready to report on any tidbit of information they can scrounge up. Journalists who research background information, speak with sources and validate facts before reporting a story are a dying breed. Dan Rather, a highly respected news anchor, recently found himself engulfed in scandal after he presented faked documents regarding President Bush’s military service as fact. The desire to be first with the story overpowered the desire for truth and accuracy. As a result Rather, as well as the entire CBS news network, was shamed. Along with the freshness of a story, entertainment value is also very important. Epstein accuses news organizations of, "[...resorting] to entertainment conventions that exploit the dramatic elements of[...]tragedy" (1).
Entertainment and news are two completely separate media with different values and standards, yet modern journalism is beginning to exhibit characteristics similar to those of a television drama. Stories about celebrities are quickly becoming more commonplace on prime time newscasts and there are even "news" programs, such as E! News Live, that are dedicated to celebrity activity. D’Antonio believes that these programs exist because they are, "cheap and easy to produce, and [have] a certain mass appeal" (3). This sudden rush of celebrity gossip in news programs makes it difficult to distinguish between legitimate reporting and tabloid reporting (D’Antonio 3). "Buzz" and "sizzle" are two additional entertainment elements that have become prominent in modern journalism. Plainly speaking, they measure the amount of appeal a news story or article has. Stories with more buzz and sizzle get more air time and more attention. "Buzz can raise newsstand sales, get your article optioned by a film company and turn a journalist into a hot commodity" (D’Antonio 3-4). Although this may sound appealing to some reporters, D’Antonio warns that, "[...]efforts to put style over substance[...]mislead readers" (4). Gloria Cooper, the executive editor of the Columbia Journalism Review, believes that the use of elements such as these classifies as "manipulation" and is a "[...]deliberate effort to bring showbiz values into the news" (1)- where they definitely do not belong. There has been a steady increase of "yellow journalism" (the use of flashy features and exaggerated news) in attempts to attract readers and viewers. Although a good number of reporters disapprove of such tactics, some argue that certain entertainment values are necessary for a successful news program or paper. Peter Iglinski, the president of Public Radio News Directors Incorporated, argues that, "[...]balancing [entertainment and journalism] simply requires a degree of deftness" (1). Iglinski argues that news and entertainment are separate media but believes that successful journalism must contain a certain amount of entertainment value in order to hold the audience’s attention. However, Cooper warns that, "[...]direct[ing] the news in the interest of making it more appealing is always dangerous business[...]trivial manipulations can compromise the integrity of the news event- and further validate the public’s distrust [of journalism] when the manipulations come to light" (2).
When deciding to become a journalist, one accepts the responsibilities that come along with the profession. Among those responsibilities is fairness. A journalist’s duty is to report both sides of any story objectively and without bias. "Balanced stories rarely get the blood boiling. But what good reporting lacks in sizzle is made up for in authenticity" (D’Antonio 2). A journalist must constantly evaluate their priorities and make sure their heart and mind are both in the right place. If a journalist harbors goals of benefitting themself as opposed to the public, then the quality and integrity of the journalism suffers. Reporting honestly and accurately are also a journalist’s responsibility. Without honesty a story is not news; it is fiction. It is immoral to pass fallacies off as fact, especially if the reporter is aware of the deception. Impartiality is also an important quality for journalists to possess. "Modesty of opinion and holding back ultimate judgements of value produce a report that invites the audience to weight information for itself" (Fuller 758). Although it is virtually impossible for a reporter to be unbiased regarding any particular issue, the bias does not have to be evident in the reporting itself (Fuller 758). Becoming aware of personal biases allows a journalist to take extra care when reporting and ultimately leads to more reliable news coverage.
Squires provides a grim outlook on America’s journalistic future: "[...]the lines between news and entertainment have been forever obliterated [...and] the standards of journalism have been relaxed to the point of nonexistence" (768). Although it may seem hopeless, it is not entirely impossible to restore ethics and values to journalism. Elimination of the superficial elements that adorn modern newscasts and higher standards for reporters are just a few ways to repair the institution. However, not all of the problems regarding the profession can be blamed on the news organizations and reporters- and not all of the problems can be solved by them either. The public must take some responsibility for the corruption of journalism. It is the public’s duty to be more critical of reporting, to ask questions and demand more from news organizations. A clear line between news and entertainment must be reestablished and in order to reestablish that line, the public must reevaluate what they want and expect from modern news. If these changes are not made a very ominous future awaits and, "between[...]news and entertainment, a perfectly symmetrical exchange of values may soon, at long last, be achieved" (Cooper 3).