Are Journalists Ruthless?

Caitlin Hunt
ch968116@ohio.edu

Whenever I share with strangers or extended family members my dreams of a career in journalism, their brows cross in confusion and their heads tilt slightly to an angle. I often get, "How could a sweet girl like you want to be something so ruthless?" I, then, must return their response and think to myself are journalists and the field of journalism ruthless?

It's no question that today the media is viewed poorly. According to a recent Hill Harris X poll, 33% of Americans believe that the media is the "enemy of the people," a sentiment that is often used by President Trump. I find that there is no straight answer as to why trust in the media has dropped, but I don't believe it is because of "ruthless" journalists.

When imagining a journalist, the public may imagine a hard-hitting, undercover reporter, who will do anything and everything to get the latest scoop. Or, they may visualize reporters as puppets in some corporate scheme to tilt the truth. Either way, both of these viewpoints take away the most crucial part of a journalist: their character.

Believe it or not, but journalists are people too! Crazy, right? Journalists often have to act on their conscience when conducting interviews or writing stories. They decide how to cover a story or which angle to take. They can also walk away from a job if they don't feel comfortable in what's being produced. Journalists are individuals with personal power and the power of knowledge.

And with that power comes great responsibility. The public's view of journalists may come from lack of transparency or understanding of the journalism field. To remain in good character as a journalist, one must be open to sharing their practices, like how they obtained sources for a story or sharing the ethics within the field.

Transparency is an essential link between the public and the media because it benefits both parties. When the public understands, how or why a story was published or broadcasted the way it is, they begin to recognize the typical practices of journalism. The media is no longer treated as some secret society or a conspiracy theory. The public now trusts what information is before them.



(Courtesy of Kevin.Lexiblog.com)

Journalist publications and broadcasts could also see lower levels of criticism, and the trust of the public now helps them be more productive in creating stories.

This may seem like a pipe dream, and maybe it is, but the idea of transparency appears to be working. "Serial," a true-crime podcast, has been a hit with the public. The Colombia Journalism Review says this is because host/reporter Sarah Koenig is transparent with her thoughts and process behind her coverage. Koenig is not only creating a new type of journalism, but she is also adding more credibility to the field of journalism.

So, are journalists ruthless? I don't think so at least. Sure, there may be a few hardcore journalists around, but for the most part no. I find that this label may stem from the fact that the public may not know what a journalist does or the process behind it. They feel that they can't fully put their faith in the media because they aren't sure what that is. That means it's up to us as the media to be transparent and educate our audiences on just what we do because journalists need an audience and the public needs journalists.