Addressing what ails the press
Here's a post I've had sitting around in draft form for more than a week, waiting for a moment to write it up. It's about the problems that have been assailing the newspaper business. I spotted this intruiging piece in The New York Review of Books ("The Press: The Enemy Within" by Michael Massing). It's a lengthy piece, and I only have time to give the briefest plug for it, but it does a good job of summing up many of the points I've raised in this blog about the inadequacies of the press in its coverage of many of the biggest stories of recent years - from the 2004 election to Iraq War to the Plame Affair to Hurricane Katrina. It includes some serious criticism of the country's most prestigious news organizations, from journalists who worked on the inside, such as Nancy Cleeland and Ken Silverstein of the Los Angeles Times, and Tom Fenton at CBS (who has also written his own damning indictment of that network: Bad News).
Although Massing concedes that, since Katrina, "journalists have been asking more pointed questions at press conferences, attempting to investigate cronyism and corruption in the White House and Congress, and doing more to document the plight of people without jobs or a place to live," he wonders:
- Will such changes prove lasting? In a previous article, I described many of the external pressures besetting journalists today, including a hostile White House, aggressive conservative critics, and greedy corporate owners. [2] Here, I will concentrate on the press's internal problems - not on its many ethical and professional lapses, which have been extensively discussed elsewhere, but rather on the structural problems that keep the press from fulfilling its responsibilities to serve as a witness to injustice and a watchdog over the powerful. To some extent, these problems consist of professional practices and proclivities that inhibit reporting - a reliance on "access," an excessive striving for "balance," an uncritical fascination with celebrities. Equally important is the increasing isolation of much of the profession from disadvantaged Americans and the difficulties they face. Finally, and most significantly, there's the political climate in which journalists work. Today's political pressures too often breed in journalists a tendency toward self-censorship, toward shying away from the pursuit of truths that might prove unpopular, whether with official authorities or the public.
This is a busy time for everyone in higher education. But I'd definitely recommend this article to those of you interested in trying to understand why the press is at an all-time low in terms of public trust and confidence.
5 Comments:
I feel like there has been a lot going on in the past year. Maybe it's just me, but it seems to be a lot more than usual. Not that that has anything to do with public trust and confidence, but maybe it has everything to do with how much the public can handle at one time. It's important to get the messages out there, but at what point do people stop listening? Also, the press may be at an "all-time low in terms of public trust and confidence" because of the increasing about of private and secure things that are happening within our country... such as terrorist issues. Not sure of my thoughts on it, but sometimes not letting everything out might be a help sometimes.
above response from Melody Kuzniar
He's right on all the points he makes in the excerpt from the article. Instead of pointing out the "many ethical and professional lapses," of the media, it's refreshing to see someone take a look at the bigger structural weaknesses that keep the press from truly "fulfilling its responsibilities to serve as a witness to injustice and a watchdog over the powerful." I hope he discusses solutions in the article, and offers some glimmer of hope, because as someone who really does care about the future of our nation, it really seems that too many people prefer to be blind to any sort of wrongdoing for there to be a realistic possibility of change.
Lucas Magyarics
Of the internal problems within the press listed in the excerpt of the article, the one that I have noticed the most is the excessive striving for balance. It seems to me that the relativly recent phenomenon is a response to public's general mistrust of the media. While the approach has not only failed to restore confidence in the media as it was intended, it can be detrimental in the factual reporting on a story when more voices are heard on one side of an issue than the other. For example, if a writer is assigned to write a story about a community coming together to oppose the building of a big-box store that residents feel will damage the community's small-town feel, naturally he or she would want to report on both sides of the argument. However, if opinions voiced by residents were almost entirely against the building of the store, and few to no voices were heard outside of the people directly proposing the building, an adherence to "balanced" reporting would dictate that equal space in the article should be given to both sides of the argument. Factual reporting would call for communication of the fairly one-sided nature of the issue, but the reporter might feel pressure to inadequatly represent the voices against the building in order that they not exceed the voices heard for the proposal. The journalist would obviously be trying to avoid accusations of unfair reporting, but what was really called for to be reported in the article, (more people opposing the project that supporting it), wouldn't be communicated. That is not to say that balance in reporting is a bad thing, but the extent with which the media is taken with it can actually be counter to the aim of the idea: to accurately report on happenings in society.
-Jacob Kriss
The implications that are presented in the article do not do much to give confidence in the US press machine. With the top staffs of our news organizations living life comfortably in the "upper middle class," it seems unlikely that they able to view the concerns of the working-class. Because of this problem, as well as a combination of others ranging from unfair "balancing" of the government parties, to the articles that are never written because of a shortage of staff, I find it very disconcerting to know that there are so many problems with the press. The press is supposed to be our link to the government - it gives us the ability to know what is occuring in our world, and in what ways corruption is within our nation and how we as a society can change it for the better. At least, that is what it is supposed to do. It seems very hard for the press to reach the status it once had a purpose for, but as for now, it takes a very keen eye to spot the articles that are of noteworthy claims and are fulfilling the job that true journalism should strive for.
sokin david yoon
Post a Comment
<< Home