jd540914@ohio.edu
A common remark that many journalism students have probably been asked might go something like this: "Why are you going to school majoring in journalism, when any random person can sit down and write in a blog and consider themselves to be a journalist?" While it may seem rude or repetitive, this is actually a question that journalists and those that study journalism have been asking for quite some time.
As discussed in chapter one of "The Elements of Journalism," the question that researchers are asking themselves is not so much about if someone is a "journalist" by definition, but rather if they are producing content that fully encompasses the character of journalism itself. Although the book is not so up to date on the most recent social media boom, it comes at the rise of the internet and online content as a means of journalism. Chapter one covers much of the changing landscape that journalists face on the cusp of digital media's growth, and how they had to adjust and adapt, or be left behind.
To get down to it, modern technology changed journalism. It also changed just who can be a journalist, as the book states that as a result of the internet and social media, anyone can be a content creator, and make their own type of journalism.
Aside from TV news, many people get their information online, from social media sites or online versions of newspapers like The New York Times, so the ability to get hundreds of news stories lies in one's smartphone or computer. Not only can someone share an article on Facebook or Twitter, but they can commentate and caption their article to express personal opinions in support or in opposition to the source.
This can be a good or bad thing, depending on how it is looked at, with "fake news" spreading far and wide among social media sites, it is becoming increasingly difficult for users to decide what is real and what is false. One could argue that social media expands First Amendment rights, allowing people to express opinions freely, but it is also a way for false information to spread quickly.
Consider Hurricane Harvey, whose devastation was widely discussed on social media. There was an outpouring of compassion and support for those affected, and #PrayForHouston hashtags were used with messages for victims.
With that, came a firestorm of pictures people had taken of the damage, or people volunteering their time to assist in the relief effort. The catch is, with citizen produced content, there is bound to be misinformation. Internet users argued over whether pictures of a shark swimming on the highway was true, or if Obama was indeed serving food to hurricane victims.
Some things can seem harmless, but when there is a president in office who regularly uses the term "fake news" to categorize main stream media, it may be hard to people to distinguish between actual fake news and news written in the perspective of someone who may lean to the right or left.
 |
| A shark, not swimming on a highway in Houston |
The days of journalists being "gate keepers," and monitoring what the people see and hear are over, and the media have taken on and inherited several different roles, which would be useful when asked why you are studying journalism. Yes, the role of journalists has changed, but just as journalists had to adjust to the age of the internet, so must today's journalists learn to live in the world of "fake news," and find ways to combat it, as well as compete with blogs and user created content.
As the book explains, journalists are not holding the information like a deck of cards, deciding which ones to play at certain times, new breaks and spread like wildfire on Twitter, Facebook, and Snapchat. Instead, they are counted on to verify what information and news are reliable (and which pictures and stories are not) and to "authenticate" that information.
It is another job of journalists to help the readers to make sense of what they are reading, to provide detailed explanations and infographics so that if the consumer wants to get a closer, more in depth look, they can do so. Journalists also are there to actually witness events that they are covering, ones that maybe no one else is.
Yes, someone can take a picture of a protester carrying a sign on a city street, but that same person most likely cannot travel to another country to cover topics like ISIS or the Russian government. Journalists are needed to do jobs like this, to really report on things that are going on, which many people who are against the media may fail to recognize.
Lastly, journalists still function as a fourth branch of government- the watchdog. On the New York Times website, it even states, "Journalism that matters. More essential now than ever" while encouraging readers to pay for a subscription. When journalists are called liars or are constantly being attacked by the executive branch of government, it can make it seem more difficult to actually be a watchdog. But does that just make it more pressing than it has ever been?
As the book explains, journalists are not holding the information like a deck of cards, deciding which ones to play at certain times, new breaks and spread like wildfire on Twitter, Facebook, and Snapchat. Instead, they are counted on to verify what information and news are reliable (and which pictures and stories are not) and to "authenticate" that information.
It is another job of journalists to help the readers to make sense of what they are reading, to provide detailed explanations and infographics so that if the consumer wants to get a closer, more in depth look, they can do so. Journalists also are there to actually witness events that they are covering, ones that maybe no one else is.
Yes, someone can take a picture of a protester carrying a sign on a city street, but that same person most likely cannot travel to another country to cover topics like ISIS or the Russian government. Journalists are needed to do jobs like this, to really report on things that are going on, which many people who are against the media may fail to recognize.
Lastly, journalists still function as a fourth branch of government- the watchdog. On the New York Times website, it even states, "Journalism that matters. More essential now than ever" while encouraging readers to pay for a subscription. When journalists are called liars or are constantly being attacked by the executive branch of government, it can make it seem more difficult to actually be a watchdog. But does that just make it more pressing than it has ever been?
No comments:
Post a Comment