Returning to the foundation

A journalist has to be dynamic. Every day bring new events, changes, atrocities and scandals. Also with the passage of time comes the power of innovation, technology and the ever-increasing connectedness of the human race. The consequences of these events and connections are not limited to the public that reads about them. Journalism, like everything else, is just as susceptible to the whims of change and cultural movement.

The industry is rapidly changing. Blogs, mp3s, iPods, and all the millions of “dot com’s” will have, and are having, a huge influence on the way news is gathered. With this comes “an inevitable clash of values between a newspaper, which has a journalistic reputation and brand name to protect, and a swiftly changing medium that has grown in power and prestige precisely because it has flouted many of journalism’s traditional rules.”

Accompanying this clash is something potentially more sinister. Renowned scholar Neil Postman wrote about this in his book Amusing Ourselves to Death. “When a population becomes distracted by trivia, when cultural life is redefined as a perpetual round of entertainments, when serious public conversation becomes a form of baby-talk, when, in short, a people become an audience and their public business a vaudeville act, then a nation finds itself at risk; culture-death is a clear possibility.”

Postman wrote his book in 1985, but his predictions are ringing frighteningly true in this generation. Society is becoming more “connected” yes, this was shown in our lecture with the staggering graph of home media capacity. But this connection is creating another type of separateness and isolation. Though we may seem to be more connected, it is all through wires, screens and electronic emissions that this connection happens. This creates a great lack of personal feelings and human emotion. Studies have shown the attention span of each generation is getting shorter. This means that the journalist, once again, must become dynamic.

The Internet has saturated the world with information. It has such a vast expanse of knowledge contained in it that the possibilities of this technology seem almost limitless. Journalists bemoan the fact that anyone can be a published writer with the Internet. This seems rather silly; because this is essentially the way it was when journalism started. Everyone wrote what he or she could about what they knew. But it was the talented, those select individuals that could assimilate all the information and help make sense of it, that became journalists.

Marshall MacLuhan, one of the primary figureheads on media discourse, said, “The medium is the message.” Keeping this in mind, we, as journalists, must question what messages can be conveyed on our new mediums. As the trained proprietors of information, we have the ability and the responsibility to find out how best to employ a specific medium to effectively communicate our message.

But as the medium has changed, so too must our message. In a Columbia Journalism Review article titled “Beyond News,” some good suggestions are offered as to what journalists can do to keep their profession alive, and still be “professional.” “The extra value our quality news organizations can and must regularly add is analysis: thoughtful, incisive attempts to divine the significance of events — insights, not just information.” This is why real journalists are trained. They are taught to analyze, to think past the facts and to make sense of them. Yes, information can be obtained sometimes moments after it happens, but information is of little value without context. If our profession is to stay credible, reliable and relevant we must return to the basic journalistic values and give that context, give the information meaning.

Regardless of where people read their news, journalists must remain dedicated to offering it to the public. A free press is what holds democracy together. If the news stopped for a day, dictators would be left to do as they please, crime would go unnoticed, and chaos would ensue. Rather than lament the slow passing of the printed page, journalists must start using the new technologies.

Millions of people are writing about anything and everything. But journalists need to stay focused on what is important, even necessary, for the public to know. A journalist’s role in the new age of connectivity is going to be the same as it was when journalism began. A modern journalist has to be in tune with the desires of the public, but temper that input with discerning judgment. Give the big picture, give the public meaning, and they in turn will give us their attention.

Sources:
1. American Journalism Review. Dec. 2006/Jan. 2007 Pg. 63
2. Postman, Neil. Amusing Ourselves to Death Pgs. 155-156
3. Columbia Journalism Review. Jan/Feb. 2007 Pg. 35
4. Class lecture on changing media