Media construction and crime reporting

Corttany Brooks
cb970011@ohio.edu 
Make up blog 10/13

Crime reporting has risen dramatically in newsrooms across America, and some studies suggest viewers want more of these stories. As fascinating as crime may be for some viewers, is it right that a local news station air the gory details of a tragic event, possibly jeopardizing an ongoing police investigation, and violating suspects' rights? How much does the public need to know?

For reporters, the struggle over how far to pursue a story may present serious ethical and even moral complications. Investigative reporting, on any level, requires asking invasive and sensitive questions of people who may not want their privacy invaded. 

Aside from the moral and ethical objections of some reporters to acting with disregard for suffering victims, there is a far more practical reason for exercising restraint. In-depth crime reporting and investigating depends upon reporters and producers cultivating and sustaining relationships with well-placed, informed sources, like employees of the police department or other city, county, or state agencies. If a reporter burns those bridges by revealing confidential information that impedes an investigation, those sources may, in the future, refrain from sharing information.

Unfortunately (I use this adjective as a personal belief), a basic fact in the news media is that, if a story involves a brutal death or injury of some kind (or the likelihood of it), it is likely to get higher ratings. The more lurid the story, the better its chances of being the ratings leader. Natural disasters, bank robberies, shootouts, rapes, serial killers, and school violence all draw an army of news vans the same way that a limping gazelle draws a pride of lions. 

This mantra is deeply ingrained in journalistic norms. Newsworthiness is determined by several factors, and destruction fulfills many of them a lot better than news about society working its wonders another day. Also, because getting information on them is easy (through the police or government agencies via press releases) and since they take place on public streets where permits or business permission are never required to film near, they are generally rather cheap to cover. They also tend to provide flashy visuals.

Some have suggested that coverage like this, focusing on negative stories of war, death, and destruction rather than the positive things that are happening in society, is responsible for making people cynical about the world around them. People who watch the news start to feel that the world is going to hell in a handbasket, and give up on the idea that society's problems can be fixed. In addition, when the media obsess over violent crimes, deeper problems with society (such as cities running out of money) go ignored, leaving the public uninformed.

Even further, this type of coverage is even being glamorized by Hollywood blockbusters like ‘Nightcrawler’, which chronicles the life of an aspiring video journalist who spends his nights cruising the streets of L.A., hunting and prying to capture violent crimes or accidents on his video camera, in order to sell the footage to news stations. Although this film presents an extreme and stylized reflection of the news industry, people love the narrative, and our industry phrase, “if it bleeds, it leads” remains at the front of the news scene. 

'Nightcrawler' Official Trailer (Via Youtube)

Picture Imperfect

Robert Guliano

rg116107@ohio.edu

Our recent readings have shed light on an interesting failure in journalistic values.

It is easy to imagine a written piece falling a little short of completely neutral and objective. It is natural that some degree of bias will show up one way or another in a wordy article. This is simply a byproduct of the english language. However, such a failure in the realm of "photo journalism" is not very conceivable and not likely excusable.

Photo's by their nature are journalistic. If a photo is taken and submitted as it comes out, no one on God's green Earth can plausibly question its objectivity. It touches all the fundamental values of journalism and does so naturally.

So, when a photo is doctored and published in a journalistic environment, it is surely subject to scrutiny. The idea that a professional "photo journalist" can make money by taking pictures is certainly generous enough. This only heightens the shame in abusing the privilege.

This holds true for writing and broadcasting as well (every blogger or even tweeter can be a reporter), but it is even easier for anyone to be a photographer (or photojournalist) by definition. Photographs can tell a story faster and with less effort (wording things for an audience or AP style). To put into perspective just how small the gap is between a paid photographer and a regular person, I like to use the following Ohio University example:

Every drunk college girl is a photographer or photojournalist on Thursday through Saturday nights.

Think about this statement another way. An Ohio University student wants to view media content covering Halloween night. Often times the first place that student gets the content is on social media.

Frequently, Sally Snapshot happens to be the same person as Fiona Friend Request. People will either inadvertently or purposely see her pictures on Facebook or Twitter long before they will go to The Post's new and improved website.

This makes the margin for error or ethical slip-up pretty tight in the world of photojournalism. Photojournalists seem like they are rather replaceable, especially at localized media outlets. It would be ignorant not to note that this very concept fuels photojournalists to compromise ethics.

If they can produce superior photographs, then their respective jobs will be safe. The media (perhaps more so than many other industries) is a highly competitive arena. From its management at the top to an individual level, it is full of competition. This may be natural of a capitalist economy, but it is vital to examine the possibility that people like photographers have incentive to push the envelope and set themselves apart from the pack.

The fascinating thing about examining the behavior of these photojournalists is that the same competitiveness that led to their professional prominence ended up sinking them in the end. That is why ethics is so inscrutable. It is not cut and dry like the law is (for the most part). Ethics has a slippery slope, notably in journalism.

Managing that slope is what #jour412 is all about.