Journalism ethics and standards comprise principles of ethics and of good practice as applicable to the specific challenges faced by professional journalists. Historically and currently, this subset of media ethics is widely known to journalists as their professional "code of ethics" or the "canons of journalism." The basic codes and canons commonly appear in statements drafted by both professional journalism associations and individual print, broadcast, and online news organizations.
“
Every news organization has only its credibility and reputation to rely on.
”
-Tony Burman, editor-in-chief of CBC News[1]
While various existing codes have some differences, most share common elements including the principles of — truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness and public accountability — as these apply to the acquisition of newsworthy information and its subsequent reportage to the public.
Like many broader ethical systems, journalism ethics include the principle of "limitation of harm." This often involves the withholding of certain details from reports such as the names of minor children, crime victims' names or information not materially related to particular news reports release of which might, for example, harm someone's reputation.
Evolution and purpose of codes of journalism
The principles of Journalistic codes of ethics are designed as guides through numerous difficulties, such as conflicts of interest, to assist journalists in dealing with ethical dilemmas. The codes and canons provide journalists a framework for self-monitoring and self-correction as they pursue professional assignments.
[edit] Codes of practice
While journalists in the United States and European countries have led in formulation and adoption of these standards, such codes can be found in news reporting organizations in most countries with freedom of the press. The written codes and practical standards vary somewhat from country to country and organization to organization, but there is a substantial overlap among mainstream publications and societies.
One of the leading voices in the U.S. on the subject of Journalistic Standards and Ethics is the Society of Professional Journalists. The Preamble to its Code of Ethics states:
...public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist's credibility.
The Radio-Television News Directors Association, an organization exclusively centered on electronic journalism, maintains a code of ethics centering on -- public trust, truthfulness, fairness, integrity, independence and accountability.[2] RTDNA publishes a pocket guide to these standards.[3]
Examples of journalistic codes of ethics held by international news gathering organizations may be found as follows:
British Broadcasting Corporation: Editorial Guidelines.
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation: Journalistic Standards and Practices
Al Jazeera: Code of Ethics.
Code of Journalists of the Republic of Slovenia
[edit] Common elements
The primary themes common to most codes of journalistic standards and ethics are the following.
[edit] Objectivity
Unequivocal separation between news and opinion. In-house editorials and opinion (Op-Ed) pieces are clearly separated from news pieces. News reporters and editorial staff are distinct.
Unequivocal separation between advertisements and news. All advertisements must be clearly identifiable as such.
Reporter must avoid conflicts of interest — incentives to report a story with a given slant. This includes not taking bribes and not reporting on stories that affect the reporter's personal, economic or political interests. See envelope journalism.
Competing points of view are balanced and fairly characterized.
Persons who are the subject of adverse news stories are allowed a reasonable opportunity to respond to the adverse information before the story is published or broadcast.
Interference with reporting by any entity, including censorship, must be disclosed.
[edit] Sources
Confidentiality of anonymous sources (see news source).
Avoidance of anonymous sources if possible.
Accurate attribution of statements made by individuals or other news media.
Pictures, sound, and quotations must not be presented in a misleading context (or lack thereof). Simulations, reenactments, alterations, and artistic imaginings must be clearly labelled as such, if not avoided entirely.
Plagiarism is strongly stigmatized and in many cases illegal (see copyright).
[edit] Accuracy and standards for factual reporting
Reporters are expected to be as accurate as possible given the time allotted to story preparation and the space available, and to seek reliable sources.
Events with a single eyewitness are reported with attribution. Events with two or more independent eyewitnesses may be reported as fact. Controversial facts are reported with attribution.
Independent fact-checking by another employee of the publisher is desirable
Corrections are published when errors are discovered
Defendants at trial are treated only as having "allegedly" committed crimes, until conviction, when their crimes are generally reported as fact (unless, that is, there is serious controversy about wrongful conviction).
Opinion surveys and statistical information deserve special treatment to communicate in precise terms any conclusions, to contextualize the results, and to specify accuracy, including estimated error and methodological criticism or flaws.
[edit] Slander and libel considerations
Reporting the truth is never libel, which makes accuracy and attribution very important.
Private persons have privacy rights that must be balanced against the public interest in reporting information about them. Public figures have fewer privacy rights.
Publishers vigorously defend libel lawsuits filed against their reporters.
[edit] Harm limitation principle
During the normal course of an assignment a reporter might go about — gathering facts and details, conducting interviews, doing research, background checks, taking photos, video taping, recording sound -- should he or she report everything learned? If so, how should this be done? The principle of limitation of harm means that some weight needs to be given to the negative consequences of full disclosure, creating a practical and ethical dilemma. The Society of Professional Journalists' code of ethics offers the following advice, which is representative of the practical ideals of most professional journalists. Quoting directly:[4]
Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.
Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.
Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone's privacy.
Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.
Be cautious about identifying juvenile suspects or victims of sex crimes.
Be judicious about naming criminal suspects before the formal filing of charges.
Balance a criminal suspect's fair trial rights with the public's right to be informed.
[edit] Presentation
Main articles: News writing, Journalism,
Ethical standards should not be confused with common standards of quality of presentation, including:
Correctly spoken or written language (often in a widely spoken and formal dialect, such as Standard English)
Clarity
Brevity (or depth, depending on the niche of the publisher)
[edit] Self-regulation
In addition to codes of ethics, many news organizations maintain an in-house Ombudsman whose role is, in part, to keep news organizations honest and accountable to the public. The ombudsman is intended to mediate in conflicts stemming from internal and or external pressures, and to maintain accountability to the public for news reported. Also, to foster self-criticism and to encourage adherence to both codified and uncodified ethics and standards. This position may be the same or similar to the public editor, though public editors also act as a liaison with readers and do not generally become members of the Organisation of News Ombudsmen.
An alternative is a news council, an industry-wide self-regulation body, such as the Press Complaints Commission, set up by UK newspapers and magazines. Such a body is capable perhaps of applying fairly consistent standards, and of dealing with a higher volume of complaints, but may not escape criticisms of being toothless.
[edit] Ethics and standards in practice
See main articles: journalism scandals, media bias, media ethics, and yellow journalism
As with other ethical codes, there is perennial concern that the standards of journalism are being ignored. One of the most controversial issues in modern reporting is media bias, especially on political issues, but also with regard to cultural and other issues. Sensationalism is also a common complaint. Minor factual errors are also extremely common, as almost anyone who is familiar with the subject of a particular report will quickly realize.
There are also some wider concerns, as the media continue to change, for example that the brevity of news reports and use of soundbites has reduced fidelity to the truth, and may contribute to a lack of needed context for public understanding. From outside the profession, the rise of news management contributes to the real possibility that news media may be deliberately manipulated. Selective reporting (spiking, double standards) are very commonly alleged against newspapers, and by their nature are forms of bias not easy to establish, or guard against.
This section does not address specifics of such matters, but issues of practical compliance, as well as differences between professional journalists on principles.
[edit] Standards and reputation
Among the leading news organizations that voluntarily adopt and attempt to uphold the common standards of journalism ethics described herein, adherence and general quality varies considerably. The professionalism, reliability and public accountability of a news organization are three of its most valuable assets. An organization earns and maintains a strong reputation, in part, through a consistent implementation of ethical standards, which influence its position with the public and within the industry.
[edit] Genres and ethics
Advocacy journalists — a term of some debate even within the field of journalism — by definition tend to reject "objectivity", while at the same time maintaining many other common standards and ethics.
Creative nonfiction and Literary journalism use the power of language and literary devices more akin to fiction to bring insight and depth into often book-length treatment of the subjects about which they write. Such devices as dialogue, metaphor, digression and other such techniques offer the reader insights not usually found in standard news reportage. However, authors in this branch of journalism still maintain ethical criteria such as factual and historical accuracy as found in standard news reporting. Yet, with brilliant prose, they venture outside the boundaries of standard news reporting in offering richly detailed accounts. One widely regarded author in the genre is Joyce Carol Oates, as with her book on boxer Mike Tyson.
New Journalism and Gonzo journalism also reject some of the fundamental ethical traditions and will set aside the technical standards of journalistic prose in order to express themselves and reach a particular audience or market segment.
Tabloid journalists are often accused of sacrificing accuracy and the personal privacy of their subjects in order to boost sales. Supermarket tabloids are often focused on entertainment rather than news. A few have "news" stories that are so outrageous that they are widely read for entertainment purposes, not for information. Some tabloids do purport to maintain common journalistic standards, but may fall far short in practice. Others make no such claims.
Some publications deliberately engage in satire, but give the publication the design elements of a newspaper, for example, The Onion, and it is not unheard of for other publications to offer the occasional, humorous articles appearing on April Fool's Day.
[edit] Relationship with freedom of the press
In countries without freedom of the press, the majority of people who report the news may not follow the above-described standards of journalism. Very often non-free media are prohibited from criticizing the national government, and in many cases are required to distribute propaganda as if it were news. Various other forms of censorship may restrict reporting on issues the government deems sensitive.
[edit] Variations, violations, and controversies
There are a number of finer points of journalistic procedure that foster disagreements in principle and variation in practice among "mainstream" journalists in the free press. Laws concerning libel and slander vary from country to country, and local journalistic standards may be tailored to fit. For example, the United Kingdom has a broader definition of libel than does the United States.
Accuracy is important as a core value and to maintain credibility, but especially in broadcast media, audience share often gravitates toward outlets that are reporting new information first. Different organizations may balance speed and accuracy in different ways. The New York Times, for instance, tends to print longer, more detailed, less speculative, and more thoroughly verified pieces a day or two later than many other newspapers. 24-hour television news networks tend to place much more emphasis on getting the "scoop." Here, viewers may switch channels at a moment's notice; with fierce competition for ratings and a large amount of airtime to fill, fresh material is very valuable. Because of the fast turn-around, reporters for these networks may be under considerable time pressure, which reduces their ability to verify information.
Laws with regard to personal privacy, official secrets, and media disclosure of names and facts from criminal cases and civil lawsuits differ widely, and journalistic standards may vary accordingly. Different organizations may have different answers to questions about when it is journalistically acceptable to skirt, circumvent, or even break these regulations. Another example of differences surrounding harm reduction is the reporting of preliminary election results. In the United States, some news organizations feel that it is harmful to the democratic process to report exit poll results or preliminary returns while voting is still open. Such reports may influence people who vote later in the day, or who are in western time zones, in their decisions about how and whether or not to vote. There is also some concern that such preliminary results are often inaccurate and may be misleading to the public. Other outlets feel that this information is a vital part of the transparency of the election process, and see no harm (if not considerable benefit) in reporting it.
[edit] Taste, decency and acceptability
Audiences have different reactions to depictions of violence, nudity, coarse language, or to people in any other situation that is unacceptable to or stigmatized by the local culture or laws (such as the consumption of alcohol, homosexuality, illegal drug use, scatological images, etc.). Even with similar audiences, different organizations and even individual reporters have different standards and practices. These decisions often revolve around what facts are necessary for the audience to know.
When certain distasteful or shocking material is considered important to the story, there are a variety of common methods for mitigating negative audience reaction. Advance warning of explicit or disturbing material may allow listeners or readers to avoid content they would rather not be exposed to. Offensive words may be partially obscured or bleeped. Potentially offensive images may be blurred or narrowly cropped. Descriptions may be substituted for pictures; graphic detail might be omitted. Disturbing content might be moved from a cover to an inside page, or from daytime to late evening, when children are less likely to be watching.
There is often considerable controversy over these techniques, especially concern that obscuring or not reporting certain facts or details is self-censorship that compromises objectivity and fidelity to the truth, and which does not serve the public interest.
For example, images and graphic descriptions of war are often violent, bloody, shocking and profoundly tragic. This makes certain content disturbing to some audience members, but it is precisely these aspects of war that some consider to be the most important to convey. Some argue that "sanitizing" the depiction of war influences public opinion about the merits of continuing to fight, and about the policies or circumstances that precipitated the conflict. The amount of explicit violence and mutilation depicted in war coverage varies considerable from time to time, from organization to organization, and from country to country. (See also: Military journalism.)
Reporters have also been accused of indecency in the process of collecting news, namely that they are overly intrusive in the name of journalistic insensitivity. War correspondent Edward Behr recounts the story of a reporter during the Congo Crisis who walked into a crowd of Belgian evacuees and shouted, "Anyone here been raped and speaks English?"[5]
[edit] Campaigning in the media
Many print publications take advantage of their wide readership and print persuasive pieces in the form of unsigned editorials that represent the official position of the organization. Despite the ostensible separation between editorial writing and news gathering, this practice may cause some people to doubt the political objectivity of the publication's news reporting. (Though usually unsigned editorials are accompanied by a diversity of signed opinions from other perspectives.)
Other publications and many broadcast media only publish opinion pieces that are attributed to a particular individual (who may be an in-house analyst) or to an outside entity. One particularly controversial question is whether media organizations should endorse political candidates for office. Political endorsements create more opportunities to construe favoritism in reporting, and can create a perceived conflict of interest.
[edit] Investigative methods
Investigative journalism is largely an information-gathering exercise, looking for facts that are not easy to obtain by simple requests and searches, or are actively being concealed, suppressed or distorted. Where investigative work involves undercover journalism or use of whistleblowers, and even more if it resorts to covert methods more typical of private detectives or even spying, it brings a large extra burden on ethical standards.
Anonymous sources are double-edged - they often provide especially newsworthy information, such as classified or confidential information about current events, information about a previously unreported scandal, or the perspective of a particular group that may fear retribution for expressing certain opinions in the press. The downside is that the condition of anonymity may make it difficult or impossible for the reporter to verify the source's statements. Sometimes sources hide their identities from the public because their statements would otherwise quickly be discredited. Thus, statements attributed to anonymous sources may carry more weight with the public than they might if they were attributed. (See also: news source.)
The Washington press has been criticized in recent years for excessive use of anonymous sources, in particular to report information that is later revealed to be unreliable. The use of anonymous sources increased markedly in the period before the 2003 invasion of Iraq.[citation needed]
[edit] Science issues
The mainstream press is often criticized for poor accuracy in reporting science news. Many reporters are not scientists, and are thus not familiar with the material they are summarizing. Technical information is also difficult to contextualize for lay audiences, and short-form reporting makes providing background, context, and clarification even harder. Food scares are an example of the need for responsible science journalism, as are stories connected with the safety of medical procedures.
[edit] Examples of ethical dilemmas
One of the primary functions of journalism ethics is to aid journalists in dealing with many ethical dilemmas they may encounter. From highly sensitive issues of national security to everyday questions such as accepting a dinner from a source, putting a bumper sticker on one's car, publishing a personal opinion blog, a journalist must make decisions taking into account things such as the public's right to know, potential threats, reprisals and intimidations of all kinds, personal integrity, conflicts between editors, reporters and publishers or management, and many other such conundra. The following are illustrations of some of those.
The Pentagon Papers dealt with extremely difficult ethical dilemmas faced by journalists. Despite government intervention, The Washington Post, joined by The New York Times, felt the public interest was more compelling and both published reports. (The cases went to the Supreme Court where they were merged and are known as New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713.[6]
The Washington Post also once published a story about a listening device that the United States had installed over an undersea Soviet cable during the height of the cold war. The device allowed the United States to learn where Soviet submarines were positioned. In that case, Post Executive Editor Ben Bradlee chose not to run the story on national security grounds. However, the Soviets subsequently discovered the device and, according to Bradlee, "It was no longer a matter of national security. It was a matter of national embarrassment." However, the U.S. government still wanted The Washington Post not to run the story on the basis of national security, yet, according to Bradlee, "We ran the story. And you know what, the sun rose the next day."[7]
The Ethics Advice Line, a joint venture, public service project of Chicago Headline Club Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists and Loyola University Chicago Center for Ethics and Social Justice, provides some examples of typical ethical dilemmas reported to their ethical dilemma hotline and are typical of the kinds of questions faced by many professional journalists.
A partial listing of questions received by The Ethics Advice Line:[1]
Is it ethical to make an appointment to interview an arsonist sought by police, without informing police in advance of the interview?
Is lack of proper attribution plagiarism?
Should a reporter write a story about a local priest who confessed to a sex crime if it will cost the newspaper readers and advertisers who are sympathetic to the priest?
Is it ethical for a reporter to write a news piece on the same topic on which he or she has written an opinion piece in the same paper?
Under what circumstances do you identify a person who was arrested as a relative of a public figure, such as a local sports star?
Freelance journalists and photographers accept cash to write about, or take photos of, events with the promise of attempting to get their work on the AP or other news outlets, from which they also will be paid. Is that ethical?
Can a journalist reveal a source of information after guaranteeing confidentiality if the source proves to be unreliable?
Sunday, March 30, 2008
MediaTrends
A Journal of Modern Communications
Neo Journalism is the Name of the Game
If you find it increasingly harder to make any significant impact on the news media these days, you are not alone. PR practitioners are increasingly frustrated because the new product and the worthy community project that used to be dependable stories just aren't making it through the media channel the way they used to.
Why? Primarily because the media has gone through a significant seismic shift in recent years, and the look of the new landscape is Neo-Journalism to which the old objective, just-the-facts principles of Walter Lippman and Edward R. Morrow that prevailed for over 60 years are now in second position. Knowing what Neo-Journalism is, how it's played, and how you can leverage the principles effectively is essential in our fiercely competitive market place.
Navigating the Neo
The first thing to know about Neo-Journalism is that it is fundamentally market driven. Media organizations, whether New York Times or High Times, have a bottom line like yours: to increase market share and brand recognition.
Like most American business, the media has gone through dramatic market implosions, fragmentation and down-sizing since the 80's. In most large cities, there are over forty hours per week of prime-time news, features and pseudo-news shows. Add the morning, noon and nightly local tv broadcasts, plus radio news and the ubiquitous talk shows, and you are looking at a market place fairly atomized.
News managers need to deliver good reasons for customers to come to their products. In the corporate world, those reasons usually revolve around price, convenience, quality or customer service. In Neo-Journalism, what sets the product apart from the competition are stylistic choices: the way a story is told, the connection it makes with an audience.
Tell A Story. Put A Face on It
Tell A Story. Put A Face on It Neo-Journalism is a return to the good old days of subjective story telling, the kind of narrative reporting that started with the tabloid abrasiveness of Yellow Journalists like Pulitzer and Hearst and evolved into the stylish, subjective reporting of Ernest Hemingway, Stephen Crane, Jack London and H.L. Mencken. It is back. And it is how news, even business news, is covered today.
"The only way we can connect with an audience is to go beyond the mere facts of a story," says Bill Nigut, anchor and Political Editor, WSB-TV, Atlanta. Nigut and editors around the country have adjusted easily to the notion that their stories must now interpret the meaning of events instead of just deliver the he-said/she-said facts. It is precisely the reporters "meaning" and "interpretation" that stylistically sets the piece apart from anyone else's coverage. In addition, every news room's Neo-Journalism mantra is "Put a Face on it." Find the character, the human connection, the face, that an audience can relate to, can make an emotional connection with. One-hundred sixty-eight dead in the Oklahoma City bombing is staggering, but it is conceptual. It reaches us on a cognitive, rational level. The front page picture of a fireman holding an injured baby hits us on a profoundly intuitive, emotional level. It is the face that tells the larger story.
Yes, Virginia, There is a Bias, but it's Not What You Think
Ideological bias is still around in Neo-Journalism. Institutional bias, cynicism against government and business, is also in the mix. But "the real bias amongst Neo-Journalism managers is toward a compelling literary story" writes Washington Post media reporter, Howard Kurtz, in his thoughtful book Media Circus. If it doesn't have the age-old narrative components of tension, conflict, heart, sharp characters or a strong plot, it is not going to make it through the media chain to your market. This explains why journalists often focus so much on the process of a story, the horse race part. To help bring out the conflict, reporters often take on the accuser role in an interview, becoming surrogates for the challenging position. In other words, if David isn't there in person to challenge Goliath, the reporter will often unconsciously do it for him.
Even Goliath Has A Story to Tell
Whether you face an existing narrative -- "Brave Little David Takes On Indifferent Goliath," or whether you frame the story yourself -- "Popular Goliath Faces Attack From Radical Dave," Neo-Journalism demands that the story have character, tension or heart. A press release about your company's recent soaring sales is not going to have much of an impact. That's what profit driven companies are suppose to do. But if it looks like this recent L.A. Times story about the pager business by Karen Kaplan, you're in the neo mode.
"The Cutting Edge"
"Lynn O'Rourke Hayes is in the market for a pager. Not for herself, but for her 12 year-old son, Ben.
The five members of the Hayes family already share three pagers. The children use them to reach their parents whether they're at the office or at the movies. The parents lend them to the baby sitter before she takes the kids to the mall."
After a paragraph detailing the specific ways the Hayes family uses their pagers, and another one on the background of pagers, the story continues....
"Now wait a minute. Weren't pagers supposed to be an interim technology, awaiting quick obsolescence in a world of cellular telephones and other advanced wireless communications devices? Well, yes. But the robust health of the pager business......"
Pagers, like blacksmiths, faced extinction with the onslaught of new technology -- that is the story's tension.
The Hayes family, who show us why pagers are so necessary, are the story's face. It's not until the fourth paragraph the reader is led to the larger thrust of the piece: pagers are booming. And it's not until the fifth paragraph that we find out this story is primarily about the success of the Motorola company. This is Neo-Journalism at work. PR practitioners who understand this process are beginning to re-think what a good story is and how to frame it in ways that connect with an audience on an emotional, literary level. Most every story can be re-framed as long as the re-framing also has strong literary elements. In the O.J. Simpson case, the prosecution's narrative read "Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde." The defense re-framed it to "Rush To Judgment by a Racist Police." In this case, the re-framing was demonstrably effective
It's Not What You Say, but How You Say It
On a corporate level, executives are increasingly becoming a primary focus in their own company's stories as the old medium-is-the-message notion upgrades to a Neo- Journalism's you-are-the-message. Examples are Lee Iaccoca for Chrysler, Bill Gates for Microsoft, Bill DeVilla for Vons. If you are working with a reluctant executive who can't, or won't, use his/her own face, look within the organization for the personalities that can be used. At that point, corporate managers should not hesitate to allow the audience to experience their executive's unique humanity. After all, executives are also consumers, wives, fathers, taxpayers, etc. As a UCLA survey demonstrates, 93% of what an audience receives from a speaker is the story-teller himself, which means, as Mae West says, "It's not what you say, but how you say it." In other words, executives can no longer find cover behind detached corporate demeanors in the era of Neo-Journalism.
There is often a reluctance on the part of some managers to embrace Neo-Journalism concepts because the media requires more dramatic story-telling techniques and more user-friendly language than cognitive thinking executives are used to delivering. It's easier to be direct and to the point in "business-speak." Bottom line communication works in the board room. But in Neo-Journalism, a more narrative vocabulary is required. Images, metaphors, analogies and illustrations make strong connections with an audience and help draw them into the story.
In the age of Neo-Journalism, controversy, conflict and tension are king. To manage a successful media campaign today and deliver results that go beyond reasonable expectations, you need to be skillful at recognizing how these characteristics are used to shape news coverage and then use them to your advantage. The media needs to report stories that inform, entertain and compel an audience to either continue reading the publication, continue listening to the radio station or stay on the same channel.
As the cable and satellite industries continue expanding and offering consumers more program selections and as the computer on-line services extend their reach to more Americans, capturing the public's attention via standard methods will be nearly impossible. It's safe to say that the gap between the news and entertainment media will continue to diminish -- the O.J. Simpson case is a perfect example of this trend.
So when you move forth in your next media relations project, remember to put a "face" on your story; look for the compelling angle that has strong narrative components, and keep in mind that a little Michael Crichton mixed in with some Edward R. Morrow can do a lot to enhance your media success.
Develpoment Journalism
The term “development journalism” is used to refer to two different types of journalism. The first is a new school of journalism which began to appear in the 1960s. The idea behind this type of development journalism is similar to investigative reporting, but it focuses on conditions in developing nations and ways to improve them. The other type of development journalism involves heavy influence from the government of the nation involved. While this type of development journalism can be a powerful tool for local education and empowerment, it can also be a means of suppressing information and restricting journalists.
The first type of development journalism attempts to document the conditions within a country so that the larger world can understand them. Journalists are encouraged to travel to remote areas, interact with the citizens of the country, and report back. This type of development journalism also looks at proposed government projects to improve conditions in the country, and analyzes whether or not they will be effective. Ultimately, the journalist may come up with proposed solutions and actions in the piece, suggesting ways in which they might be implemented. Often, this type of development journalism encourages a cooperative effort between citizens of the nation and the outside world.
The second type of development journalism can walk a thin line. On the one hand, government participation in mass media can help get important information spread throughout the nation. Governments can help to educate their citizens and enlist cooperation on major development projects. However, a government can also use the idea of “development” to restrict freedom of speech for journalists. Journalists are told not to report on certain issues because it will impact the “development” of the nation in question, and therefore citizens are not actually being given access to the whole picture.
As a tool for social justice, development journalism can be very valuable. By speaking for those who cannot, a development journalist can inform the rest of the world about important issues within developing nations. Looking at the strengths and weaknesses of a country may also help identify ways in which the nation can be helped. This style of development journalism is a tool for empowerment.
When development journalism is used as a propaganda tool, however, it can become very dangerous. Many citizens are taught that the news is a reliable and useful source of information. For example, within a developing nation which has a corrupt government, journalistic exposes of the government are extremely important for reform. If journalists are not allowed to write about what is actually going on, the citizens are not well served. Several international press organizations release reviews every year which look at the freedom of press in individual nations in an attempt to bring freedom of the press to all countries for this very reason
The term “development journalism” is used to refer to two different types of journalism. The first is a new school of journalism which began to appear in the 1960s. The idea behind this type of development journalism is similar to investigative reporting, but it focuses on conditions in developing nations and ways to improve them. The other type of development journalism involves heavy influence from the government of the nation involved. While this type of development journalism can be a powerful tool for local education and empowerment, it can also be a means of suppressing information and restricting journalists.
The first type of development journalism attempts to document the conditions within a country so that the larger world can understand them. Journalists are encouraged to travel to remote areas, interact with the citizens of the country, and report back. This type of development journalism also looks at proposed government projects to improve conditions in the country, and analyzes whether or not they will be effective. Ultimately, the journalist may come up with proposed solutions and actions in the piece, suggesting ways in which they might be implemented. Often, this type of development journalism encourages a cooperative effort between citizens of the nation and the outside world.
The second type of development journalism can walk a thin line. On the one hand, government participation in mass media can help get important information spread throughout the nation. Governments can help to educate their citizens and enlist cooperation on major development projects. However, a government can also use the idea of “development” to restrict freedom of speech for journalists. Journalists are told not to report on certain issues because it will impact the “development” of the nation in question, and therefore citizens are not actually being given access to the whole picture.
As a tool for social justice, development journalism can be very valuable. By speaking for those who cannot, a development journalist can inform the rest of the world about important issues within developing nations. Looking at the strengths and weaknesses of a country may also help identify ways in which the nation can be helped. This style of development journalism is a tool for empowerment.
When development journalism is used as a propaganda tool, however, it can become very dangerous. Many citizens are taught that the news is a reliable and useful source of information. For example, within a developing nation which has a corrupt government, journalistic exposes of the government are extremely important for reform. If journalists are not allowed to write about what is actually going on, the citizens are not well served. Several international press organizations release reviews every year which look at the freedom of press in individual nations in an attempt to bring freedom of the press to all countries for this very reason.
Yellow journalism is a pejorative reference to journalism that features scandal-mongering, sensationalism, or other unethical or unprofessional practices by news media organizations or journalists. It has been loosely defined as "not quite libel".
The term originated during the Gilded Age with the circulation battles between Joseph Pulitzer's New York World and William Randolph Hearst's New York Journal. They ran from 1895 to about 1898 and can refer specifically to this period. Both papers were accused by critics of sensationalizing the news in order to drive up circulation, although the newspapers did serious reporting as well. The New York Press coined the term yellow kid journalism in early 1897 after a then-popular comic strip to describe the down-market papers of Pulitzer and Hearst, which both published versions of it during a circulation war.[1] This was soon shortened to yellow journalism with the New York Press insisting, "We called them Yellow because they are Yellow."[2]
A Journal of Modern Communications
Neo Journalism is the Name of the Game
If you find it increasingly harder to make any significant impact on the news media these days, you are not alone. PR practitioners are increasingly frustrated because the new product and the worthy community project that used to be dependable stories just aren't making it through the media channel the way they used to.
Why? Primarily because the media has gone through a significant seismic shift in recent years, and the look of the new landscape is Neo-Journalism to which the old objective, just-the-facts principles of Walter Lippman and Edward R. Morrow that prevailed for over 60 years are now in second position. Knowing what Neo-Journalism is, how it's played, and how you can leverage the principles effectively is essential in our fiercely competitive market place.
Navigating the Neo
The first thing to know about Neo-Journalism is that it is fundamentally market driven. Media organizations, whether New York Times or High Times, have a bottom line like yours: to increase market share and brand recognition.
Like most American business, the media has gone through dramatic market implosions, fragmentation and down-sizing since the 80's. In most large cities, there are over forty hours per week of prime-time news, features and pseudo-news shows. Add the morning, noon and nightly local tv broadcasts, plus radio news and the ubiquitous talk shows, and you are looking at a market place fairly atomized.
News managers need to deliver good reasons for customers to come to their products. In the corporate world, those reasons usually revolve around price, convenience, quality or customer service. In Neo-Journalism, what sets the product apart from the competition are stylistic choices: the way a story is told, the connection it makes with an audience.
Tell A Story. Put A Face on It
Tell A Story. Put A Face on It Neo-Journalism is a return to the good old days of subjective story telling, the kind of narrative reporting that started with the tabloid abrasiveness of Yellow Journalists like Pulitzer and Hearst and evolved into the stylish, subjective reporting of Ernest Hemingway, Stephen Crane, Jack London and H.L. Mencken. It is back. And it is how news, even business news, is covered today.
"The only way we can connect with an audience is to go beyond the mere facts of a story," says Bill Nigut, anchor and Political Editor, WSB-TV, Atlanta. Nigut and editors around the country have adjusted easily to the notion that their stories must now interpret the meaning of events instead of just deliver the he-said/she-said facts. It is precisely the reporters "meaning" and "interpretation" that stylistically sets the piece apart from anyone else's coverage. In addition, every news room's Neo-Journalism mantra is "Put a Face on it." Find the character, the human connection, the face, that an audience can relate to, can make an emotional connection with. One-hundred sixty-eight dead in the Oklahoma City bombing is staggering, but it is conceptual. It reaches us on a cognitive, rational level. The front page picture of a fireman holding an injured baby hits us on a profoundly intuitive, emotional level. It is the face that tells the larger story.
Yes, Virginia, There is a Bias, but it's Not What You Think
Ideological bias is still around in Neo-Journalism. Institutional bias, cynicism against government and business, is also in the mix. But "the real bias amongst Neo-Journalism managers is toward a compelling literary story" writes Washington Post media reporter, Howard Kurtz, in his thoughtful book Media Circus. If it doesn't have the age-old narrative components of tension, conflict, heart, sharp characters or a strong plot, it is not going to make it through the media chain to your market. This explains why journalists often focus so much on the process of a story, the horse race part. To help bring out the conflict, reporters often take on the accuser role in an interview, becoming surrogates for the challenging position. In other words, if David isn't there in person to challenge Goliath, the reporter will often unconsciously do it for him.
Even Goliath Has A Story to Tell
Whether you face an existing narrative -- "Brave Little David Takes On Indifferent Goliath," or whether you frame the story yourself -- "Popular Goliath Faces Attack From Radical Dave," Neo-Journalism demands that the story have character, tension or heart. A press release about your company's recent soaring sales is not going to have much of an impact. That's what profit driven companies are suppose to do. But if it looks like this recent L.A. Times story about the pager business by Karen Kaplan, you're in the neo mode.
"The Cutting Edge"
"Lynn O'Rourke Hayes is in the market for a pager. Not for herself, but for her 12 year-old son, Ben.
The five members of the Hayes family already share three pagers. The children use them to reach their parents whether they're at the office or at the movies. The parents lend them to the baby sitter before she takes the kids to the mall."
After a paragraph detailing the specific ways the Hayes family uses their pagers, and another one on the background of pagers, the story continues....
"Now wait a minute. Weren't pagers supposed to be an interim technology, awaiting quick obsolescence in a world of cellular telephones and other advanced wireless communications devices? Well, yes. But the robust health of the pager business......"
Pagers, like blacksmiths, faced extinction with the onslaught of new technology -- that is the story's tension.
The Hayes family, who show us why pagers are so necessary, are the story's face. It's not until the fourth paragraph the reader is led to the larger thrust of the piece: pagers are booming. And it's not until the fifth paragraph that we find out this story is primarily about the success of the Motorola company. This is Neo-Journalism at work. PR practitioners who understand this process are beginning to re-think what a good story is and how to frame it in ways that connect with an audience on an emotional, literary level. Most every story can be re-framed as long as the re-framing also has strong literary elements. In the O.J. Simpson case, the prosecution's narrative read "Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde." The defense re-framed it to "Rush To Judgment by a Racist Police." In this case, the re-framing was demonstrably effective
It's Not What You Say, but How You Say It
On a corporate level, executives are increasingly becoming a primary focus in their own company's stories as the old medium-is-the-message notion upgrades to a Neo- Journalism's you-are-the-message. Examples are Lee Iaccoca for Chrysler, Bill Gates for Microsoft, Bill DeVilla for Vons. If you are working with a reluctant executive who can't, or won't, use his/her own face, look within the organization for the personalities that can be used. At that point, corporate managers should not hesitate to allow the audience to experience their executive's unique humanity. After all, executives are also consumers, wives, fathers, taxpayers, etc. As a UCLA survey demonstrates, 93% of what an audience receives from a speaker is the story-teller himself, which means, as Mae West says, "It's not what you say, but how you say it." In other words, executives can no longer find cover behind detached corporate demeanors in the era of Neo-Journalism.
There is often a reluctance on the part of some managers to embrace Neo-Journalism concepts because the media requires more dramatic story-telling techniques and more user-friendly language than cognitive thinking executives are used to delivering. It's easier to be direct and to the point in "business-speak." Bottom line communication works in the board room. But in Neo-Journalism, a more narrative vocabulary is required. Images, metaphors, analogies and illustrations make strong connections with an audience and help draw them into the story.
In the age of Neo-Journalism, controversy, conflict and tension are king. To manage a successful media campaign today and deliver results that go beyond reasonable expectations, you need to be skillful at recognizing how these characteristics are used to shape news coverage and then use them to your advantage. The media needs to report stories that inform, entertain and compel an audience to either continue reading the publication, continue listening to the radio station or stay on the same channel.
As the cable and satellite industries continue expanding and offering consumers more program selections and as the computer on-line services extend their reach to more Americans, capturing the public's attention via standard methods will be nearly impossible. It's safe to say that the gap between the news and entertainment media will continue to diminish -- the O.J. Simpson case is a perfect example of this trend.
So when you move forth in your next media relations project, remember to put a "face" on your story; look for the compelling angle that has strong narrative components, and keep in mind that a little Michael Crichton mixed in with some Edward R. Morrow can do a lot to enhance your media success.
Develpoment Journalism
The term “development journalism” is used to refer to two different types of journalism. The first is a new school of journalism which began to appear in the 1960s. The idea behind this type of development journalism is similar to investigative reporting, but it focuses on conditions in developing nations and ways to improve them. The other type of development journalism involves heavy influence from the government of the nation involved. While this type of development journalism can be a powerful tool for local education and empowerment, it can also be a means of suppressing information and restricting journalists.
The first type of development journalism attempts to document the conditions within a country so that the larger world can understand them. Journalists are encouraged to travel to remote areas, interact with the citizens of the country, and report back. This type of development journalism also looks at proposed government projects to improve conditions in the country, and analyzes whether or not they will be effective. Ultimately, the journalist may come up with proposed solutions and actions in the piece, suggesting ways in which they might be implemented. Often, this type of development journalism encourages a cooperative effort between citizens of the nation and the outside world.
The second type of development journalism can walk a thin line. On the one hand, government participation in mass media can help get important information spread throughout the nation. Governments can help to educate their citizens and enlist cooperation on major development projects. However, a government can also use the idea of “development” to restrict freedom of speech for journalists. Journalists are told not to report on certain issues because it will impact the “development” of the nation in question, and therefore citizens are not actually being given access to the whole picture.
As a tool for social justice, development journalism can be very valuable. By speaking for those who cannot, a development journalist can inform the rest of the world about important issues within developing nations. Looking at the strengths and weaknesses of a country may also help identify ways in which the nation can be helped. This style of development journalism is a tool for empowerment.
When development journalism is used as a propaganda tool, however, it can become very dangerous. Many citizens are taught that the news is a reliable and useful source of information. For example, within a developing nation which has a corrupt government, journalistic exposes of the government are extremely important for reform. If journalists are not allowed to write about what is actually going on, the citizens are not well served. Several international press organizations release reviews every year which look at the freedom of press in individual nations in an attempt to bring freedom of the press to all countries for this very reason
The term “development journalism” is used to refer to two different types of journalism. The first is a new school of journalism which began to appear in the 1960s. The idea behind this type of development journalism is similar to investigative reporting, but it focuses on conditions in developing nations and ways to improve them. The other type of development journalism involves heavy influence from the government of the nation involved. While this type of development journalism can be a powerful tool for local education and empowerment, it can also be a means of suppressing information and restricting journalists.
The first type of development journalism attempts to document the conditions within a country so that the larger world can understand them. Journalists are encouraged to travel to remote areas, interact with the citizens of the country, and report back. This type of development journalism also looks at proposed government projects to improve conditions in the country, and analyzes whether or not they will be effective. Ultimately, the journalist may come up with proposed solutions and actions in the piece, suggesting ways in which they might be implemented. Often, this type of development journalism encourages a cooperative effort between citizens of the nation and the outside world.
The second type of development journalism can walk a thin line. On the one hand, government participation in mass media can help get important information spread throughout the nation. Governments can help to educate their citizens and enlist cooperation on major development projects. However, a government can also use the idea of “development” to restrict freedom of speech for journalists. Journalists are told not to report on certain issues because it will impact the “development” of the nation in question, and therefore citizens are not actually being given access to the whole picture.
As a tool for social justice, development journalism can be very valuable. By speaking for those who cannot, a development journalist can inform the rest of the world about important issues within developing nations. Looking at the strengths and weaknesses of a country may also help identify ways in which the nation can be helped. This style of development journalism is a tool for empowerment.
When development journalism is used as a propaganda tool, however, it can become very dangerous. Many citizens are taught that the news is a reliable and useful source of information. For example, within a developing nation which has a corrupt government, journalistic exposes of the government are extremely important for reform. If journalists are not allowed to write about what is actually going on, the citizens are not well served. Several international press organizations release reviews every year which look at the freedom of press in individual nations in an attempt to bring freedom of the press to all countries for this very reason.
Yellow journalism is a pejorative reference to journalism that features scandal-mongering, sensationalism, or other unethical or unprofessional practices by news media organizations or journalists. It has been loosely defined as "not quite libel".
The term originated during the Gilded Age with the circulation battles between Joseph Pulitzer's New York World and William Randolph Hearst's New York Journal. They ran from 1895 to about 1898 and can refer specifically to this period. Both papers were accused by critics of sensationalizing the news in order to drive up circulation, although the newspapers did serious reporting as well. The New York Press coined the term yellow kid journalism in early 1897 after a then-popular comic strip to describe the down-market papers of Pulitzer and Hearst, which both published versions of it during a circulation war.[1] This was soon shortened to yellow journalism with the New York Press insisting, "We called them Yellow because they are Yellow."[2]
Parachute journalism
Parachute journalism is an often derogatory term used to describe the practice thrusting journalists into an area to report on a story in which the reporter has little knowledge or experience. The lack of knowledge and tight deadlines often result in inaccurate or distorted news reports, especially during breaking news. As opposed to expert foreign correspondents who might live in the locale, news organizations will sometimes send (metaphorically by "parachute") either general assignment reporters or well-known celebrity journalists into unfamiliar areas.
Critics contend this type of journalism usually consists of reporting mere basic details and often includes the misrepresentation of facts and ignorance of contextual issues. The journalist often lacks in-depth knowledge of the situation and is usually disoriented because of the strangeness of the environment he or she is in. Often the only information immediately available is from other news organizations or from "official" or bureaucratic sources that may contain propaganda.
Journalists 'parachuted' into a strange situation often lack proper contacts. They may rely on stringers for their sources, and this can lead to strained relationships between the 'parachuter' and the stringer as the newly arrived journalist will receive most of the credit and and in the process the quality of reporting can be affected.
Due to a lack of time and knowledge, background research and independent investigation of the events at the site of occurrence can be non-existent, with most research, if any, being done in the journalist's home country before he or she sets off for the point of action. Another drawback is the tendency of parachuters to engage in pack journalism.
One advantage of this type of journalism is that the parachuter is an outsider who can look at the news event from a fresh perspective and notice things or provide an angle to the story that a stringer may have missed. He or she is more likely to be able to pinpoint what a global audience will be interested in.
Online journalism
Online journalism is defined as the reporting of facts produced and distributed via the Internet.
An early leader was The News & Observer in Raleigh, North Carolina. Steve Yelvington wrote on the Poynter Institute website about Nando, owned by The N&O, by saying "Nando evolved into the first serious, professional news site on the World Wide Web -- long before CNN, MSNBC, and other followers." It originated in the early 1990s as "NandO Land".
Many news organizations based in other media also distribute news online, but the amount they use of the new medium varies. Some news organizations use the Web exclusively or as a secondary outlet for their content. The Online News Association is the premier organization representing online journalists, with more than 800 members.
The Internet challenges traditional news organisations in several ways. Newspapers may lose classified advertising to websites, which are often targeted by interest instead of geography. These organisations are concerned about real and perceived loss of viewers and circulation to the Internet.
And the revenue gained with advertising on news websites is sometimes too small to support the site.
Even before the Internet, technology and other factors were dividing people's attention, leading
to more - but narrower - media outlets.
Photojournalism
Photojournalism is a particular form of journalism (the collecting, editing, and presenting of news material for publication or broadcast) that creates images in order to tell a news story. It is now usually understood to refer only to still images, and in some cases to video used in broadcast journalism. Photojournalism is distinguished from other close branches of photography (such as documentary photography, street photography or celebrity photography) by the qualities of:
Timeliness — the images have meaning in the context of a recently published record of events. Objectivity — the situation implied by the images is a fair and accurate representation of the events they depict in both content and tone. Narrative — the images combine with other news elements, to make facts relatable to the viewer or reader on a cultural level. Like a writer, a photojournalist is a reporter but he or she must often make decisions instantly and carry photographic equipment, often while exposed to significant obstacles (physical danger, weather, crowds).
FoundationsThe practice of illustrating news stories with photographs was made possible by printing and photography innovations that occurred between 1880 and 1897. While newsworthy events were photographed as early as the 1850s, printing presses could only publish from engravings until the 1880s. Early news photographs required that photos be re-interpreted by an engraver before they could be published.
The pioneering battlefield photographs from the Crimean War (1853 to 1856) by British press reporters such as William Simpson of the Illustrated London News and Roger Fenton were published as engravings. Similarly, the American Civil War photographs of Mathew Brady were engraved before publication in Harper's Weekly. Because the public craved more realistic representations of news stories, it was common for newsworthy photographs to be exhibited in galleries or to be copied photographically in limited numbers.
On March 4, 1880, The Daily Graphic (New York) [1] published the first halftone (rather than engraved) reproduction of a news photograph. Further innovations followed. In 1887, flash powder was invented, enabling journalists such as Jacob Riis to photograph informal subjects indoors, which led to the landmark work How the Other Half Lives[2]. By 1897, it became possible to reproduce halftone photographs on printing presses running at full speed.[3]
Despite these innovations, limitations remained, and many of the sensational newspaper and magazine stories in the period from 1897 to 1927 (see Yellow Journalism) were illustrated with engravings. In 1921, the wirephoto made it possible to transmit pictures almost as quickly as news itself could travel. However, it was not until development of the commercial 35mm Leica camera in 1925, and the first flash bulbs between 1927 and 1930 that all the elements were in place for a "golden age" of photojournalism.
[edit] Golden ageIn the "golden age" of photojournalism (1930s–1950s), some magazines (Picture Post (London), Paris Match (Paris), Arbeiter-Illustrierte-Zeitung (Berlin), Berliner Illustrierte Zeitung (Berlin), Life (USA), Sports Illustrated (USA)) and newspapers (The Daily Mirror (London), The New York Daily News (New York)) built their huge readerships and reputations largely on their use of photography, and photographers such as Robert Capa, Alfred Eisenstaedt, Margaret Bourke-White and W. Eugene Smith became well-known names.
In particular Henri Cartier-Bresson is generally held as the father of modern photojournalism. His candid shots of frozen moments, frozen in time are seen as ground breaking. His photo of a man jumping over a puddle has been called the greatest photograph of the 20th century. His Leica camera (introduced in 1925) is considered an enabler that allowed him to capture decisive moments in time. It was also the favored tool of Robert Capa.
Soldier Tony Vaccaro is also recognized as one of the pre-eminent photographers of World War II. His images taken with the modest Argus C3 captured horrific moments in war, similar to Capa's soldier being shot. Capa himself was on Omaha beach on D-Day and captured pivotal images of the conflict on that occasion. Vaccaro is also known for having developed his own images in soldier's helmets, and using chemicals found in the ruins of a camera store in 1944.
Until the 1980s, most large newspapers were printed with turn-of-the-century “letterpress” technology using easily smudged oil-based ink, off-white, low-quality “newsprint” paper, and coarse engraving screens. While letterpresses produced legible text, the photoengraving dots that formed pictures often bled or smeared and became fuzzy and indistinct. In this way, even when newspapers used photographs well — a good crop, a respectable size — murky reproduction often left readers re-reading the caption to see what the photo was all about. The Wall Street Journal adopted stippled hedcuts in 1979 to publish portraits and avoid the limitations of letterpress printing. Not until the 1980s had a majority of newspapers switched to “offset” presses that reproduce photos with fidelity on better, whiter paper.
By contrast Life, one of America’s most popular weekly magazines from 1936 through the early 1970s, was filled with photographs reproduced beautifully on oversize 11×14-inch pages, using fine engraving screens, high-quality inks, and glossy paper. Life often published a United Press International (UPI) or Associated Press (AP) photo that had been first reproduced in newspapers, but the quality magazine version appeared to be a different photo altogether.
In large part because their pictures were clear enough to be appreciated, and because their name always appeared with their work, magazine photographers achieved near-celebrity status. Life became a standard by which the public judged photography, and many of today’s photo books celebrate “photojournalism” as if it had been the exclusive province of near-celebrity magazine photographers.
The Best of Life (1973), for example, opens with a two-page (1960) group shot of 39 justly famous Life photographers. But 300 pages later, photo credits reveal that scores of the photos among Life’s “best” were taken by anonymous UPI and AP photographers.
Thus even during the golden age, because of printing limitations and the UPI and AP syndication systems, many newspaper photographers labored in relative obscurity.
[edit] Farm Security AdministrationFrom 1935 to 1942, the Farm Security Administration and its predecessor the Resettlement Administration were part of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal, and were designed to address agricultural problems and rural poverty associated with the Great Depression. A special photographic section of the agency, headed by Roy Stryker, was intended merely to provide public relations for its programs, but instead produced what some consider one of the greatest collections[4] of documentary photographs ever created in the U.S. Whether this effort can be called "photojournalism" is debatable, since the FSA photographers had more time and resources to create their work than most photojournalists usually have.
[edit] Acceptance by the art worldSince the late 1970s, photojournalism and documentary photography have increasingly been accorded a place in art galleries alongside fine art photography. Luc Delahaye, VII Photo Agency and Chien-Chi Chang are among many who regularly exhibit in galleries.
[edit] Professional organizationsThe Danish Union of Press Photographers (Pressefotografforbundet) was the first national organization for newspaper photographers in the world. It was founded in 1912 in Denmark by six press photographers in Copenhagen.[5] Today it has over 800 members.
The National Press Photographers Association (NPPA) was founded in 1946 in the U.S., and has about 10,000 members. Others around the world include the British Press Photographers Association (BPPA) founded in 1984, then relaunched in 2003, and now has around 450 members. Hong Kong Press Photographers Association (1989), Northern Ireland Press Photographers Association (2000), Pressfotografernas Klubb (Sweden, 1930), and PK — Pressefotografenes Klubb (Norway).[6]
News organisations and journalism schools run many different awards for photojournalists. Since 1968, Pulitzer Prizes have been awarded for the following categories of photojournalism: 'Feature Photography', 'Spot News Photography'. Other awards are World Press Photo, Best of Photojournalism, and Pictures of the Year as well as the UK based The Press Photographer's Year[7]
[edit] Ethical and legal considerationsPhotojournalism works within the same ethical approaches to objectivity that are applied by other journalists. What to shoot, how to frame and how to edit are constant considerations.
Often, ethical conflicts can be mitigated or enhanced by the actions of a sub-editor or picture editor, who takes control of the images once they have been delivered to the news organization. The photojournalist often has no control as to how images are ultimately used.
The emergence of digital photography offers whole new realms of opportunity for the manipulation, reproduction, and transmission of images. It has inevitably complicated many of the ethical issues involved.
The U.S. National Press Photographers Association, and other professional organizations, maintain codes of ethics to specify approaches to these issues.[8]
Major ethical issues are often inscribed with more or less success into law. Laws regarding photography can vary significantly from nation to nation. The legal situation is further complicated when one considers that photojournalism made in one country will often be published in many other countries.
[edit] The impact of new technologiesSmaller, lighter cameras greatly enhanced the role of the photojournalist. Since the 1960s, motor drives, electronic flash, auto-focus, better lenses and other camera enhancements have made picture taking easier. New digital cameras free photojournalists from the limitation of film roll length, as thousands of images can be stored on a single microdrive or memory card.
Content remains the most important element of photojournalism, but the ability to extend deadlines with rapid gathering and editing of images has brought significant changes. As recently as 15 years ago, nearly 30 minutes were needed to scan and transmit a single color photograph from a remote location to a news office for printing. Now, equipped with a digital camera, a mobile phone and a laptop computer, a photojournalist can send a high-quality image in minutes, even seconds after an event occurs. Video phones and portable satellite links increasingly allow for the mobile transmission of images from almost any point on the earth.
There is some concern by news photographers that the profession of photojournalism as it is known today could change to such a degree that it is unrecognizable as image-capturing technology naturally progresses. There is also concern that fewer print publications are commissioning serious photojournalism on timely issues.
Parachute journalism is an often derogatory term used to describe the practice thrusting journalists into an area to report on a story in which the reporter has little knowledge or experience. The lack of knowledge and tight deadlines often result in inaccurate or distorted news reports, especially during breaking news. As opposed to expert foreign correspondents who might live in the locale, news organizations will sometimes send (metaphorically by "parachute") either general assignment reporters or well-known celebrity journalists into unfamiliar areas.
Critics contend this type of journalism usually consists of reporting mere basic details and often includes the misrepresentation of facts and ignorance of contextual issues. The journalist often lacks in-depth knowledge of the situation and is usually disoriented because of the strangeness of the environment he or she is in. Often the only information immediately available is from other news organizations or from "official" or bureaucratic sources that may contain propaganda.
Journalists 'parachuted' into a strange situation often lack proper contacts. They may rely on stringers for their sources, and this can lead to strained relationships between the 'parachuter' and the stringer as the newly arrived journalist will receive most of the credit and and in the process the quality of reporting can be affected.
Due to a lack of time and knowledge, background research and independent investigation of the events at the site of occurrence can be non-existent, with most research, if any, being done in the journalist's home country before he or she sets off for the point of action. Another drawback is the tendency of parachuters to engage in pack journalism.
One advantage of this type of journalism is that the parachuter is an outsider who can look at the news event from a fresh perspective and notice things or provide an angle to the story that a stringer may have missed. He or she is more likely to be able to pinpoint what a global audience will be interested in.
Online journalism
Online journalism is defined as the reporting of facts produced and distributed via the Internet.
An early leader was The News & Observer in Raleigh, North Carolina. Steve Yelvington wrote on the Poynter Institute website about Nando, owned by The N&O, by saying "Nando evolved into the first serious, professional news site on the World Wide Web -- long before CNN, MSNBC, and other followers." It originated in the early 1990s as "NandO Land".
Many news organizations based in other media also distribute news online, but the amount they use of the new medium varies. Some news organizations use the Web exclusively or as a secondary outlet for their content. The Online News Association is the premier organization representing online journalists, with more than 800 members.
The Internet challenges traditional news organisations in several ways. Newspapers may lose classified advertising to websites, which are often targeted by interest instead of geography. These organisations are concerned about real and perceived loss of viewers and circulation to the Internet.
And the revenue gained with advertising on news websites is sometimes too small to support the site.
Even before the Internet, technology and other factors were dividing people's attention, leading
to more - but narrower - media outlets.
Photojournalism
Photojournalism is a particular form of journalism (the collecting, editing, and presenting of news material for publication or broadcast) that creates images in order to tell a news story. It is now usually understood to refer only to still images, and in some cases to video used in broadcast journalism. Photojournalism is distinguished from other close branches of photography (such as documentary photography, street photography or celebrity photography) by the qualities of:
Timeliness — the images have meaning in the context of a recently published record of events. Objectivity — the situation implied by the images is a fair and accurate representation of the events they depict in both content and tone. Narrative — the images combine with other news elements, to make facts relatable to the viewer or reader on a cultural level. Like a writer, a photojournalist is a reporter but he or she must often make decisions instantly and carry photographic equipment, often while exposed to significant obstacles (physical danger, weather, crowds).
FoundationsThe practice of illustrating news stories with photographs was made possible by printing and photography innovations that occurred between 1880 and 1897. While newsworthy events were photographed as early as the 1850s, printing presses could only publish from engravings until the 1880s. Early news photographs required that photos be re-interpreted by an engraver before they could be published.
The pioneering battlefield photographs from the Crimean War (1853 to 1856) by British press reporters such as William Simpson of the Illustrated London News and Roger Fenton were published as engravings. Similarly, the American Civil War photographs of Mathew Brady were engraved before publication in Harper's Weekly. Because the public craved more realistic representations of news stories, it was common for newsworthy photographs to be exhibited in galleries or to be copied photographically in limited numbers.
On March 4, 1880, The Daily Graphic (New York) [1] published the first halftone (rather than engraved) reproduction of a news photograph. Further innovations followed. In 1887, flash powder was invented, enabling journalists such as Jacob Riis to photograph informal subjects indoors, which led to the landmark work How the Other Half Lives[2]. By 1897, it became possible to reproduce halftone photographs on printing presses running at full speed.[3]
Despite these innovations, limitations remained, and many of the sensational newspaper and magazine stories in the period from 1897 to 1927 (see Yellow Journalism) were illustrated with engravings. In 1921, the wirephoto made it possible to transmit pictures almost as quickly as news itself could travel. However, it was not until development of the commercial 35mm Leica camera in 1925, and the first flash bulbs between 1927 and 1930 that all the elements were in place for a "golden age" of photojournalism.
[edit] Golden ageIn the "golden age" of photojournalism (1930s–1950s), some magazines (Picture Post (London), Paris Match (Paris), Arbeiter-Illustrierte-Zeitung (Berlin), Berliner Illustrierte Zeitung (Berlin), Life (USA), Sports Illustrated (USA)) and newspapers (The Daily Mirror (London), The New York Daily News (New York)) built their huge readerships and reputations largely on their use of photography, and photographers such as Robert Capa, Alfred Eisenstaedt, Margaret Bourke-White and W. Eugene Smith became well-known names.
In particular Henri Cartier-Bresson is generally held as the father of modern photojournalism. His candid shots of frozen moments, frozen in time are seen as ground breaking. His photo of a man jumping over a puddle has been called the greatest photograph of the 20th century. His Leica camera (introduced in 1925) is considered an enabler that allowed him to capture decisive moments in time. It was also the favored tool of Robert Capa.
Soldier Tony Vaccaro is also recognized as one of the pre-eminent photographers of World War II. His images taken with the modest Argus C3 captured horrific moments in war, similar to Capa's soldier being shot. Capa himself was on Omaha beach on D-Day and captured pivotal images of the conflict on that occasion. Vaccaro is also known for having developed his own images in soldier's helmets, and using chemicals found in the ruins of a camera store in 1944.
Until the 1980s, most large newspapers were printed with turn-of-the-century “letterpress” technology using easily smudged oil-based ink, off-white, low-quality “newsprint” paper, and coarse engraving screens. While letterpresses produced legible text, the photoengraving dots that formed pictures often bled or smeared and became fuzzy and indistinct. In this way, even when newspapers used photographs well — a good crop, a respectable size — murky reproduction often left readers re-reading the caption to see what the photo was all about. The Wall Street Journal adopted stippled hedcuts in 1979 to publish portraits and avoid the limitations of letterpress printing. Not until the 1980s had a majority of newspapers switched to “offset” presses that reproduce photos with fidelity on better, whiter paper.
By contrast Life, one of America’s most popular weekly magazines from 1936 through the early 1970s, was filled with photographs reproduced beautifully on oversize 11×14-inch pages, using fine engraving screens, high-quality inks, and glossy paper. Life often published a United Press International (UPI) or Associated Press (AP) photo that had been first reproduced in newspapers, but the quality magazine version appeared to be a different photo altogether.
In large part because their pictures were clear enough to be appreciated, and because their name always appeared with their work, magazine photographers achieved near-celebrity status. Life became a standard by which the public judged photography, and many of today’s photo books celebrate “photojournalism” as if it had been the exclusive province of near-celebrity magazine photographers.
The Best of Life (1973), for example, opens with a two-page (1960) group shot of 39 justly famous Life photographers. But 300 pages later, photo credits reveal that scores of the photos among Life’s “best” were taken by anonymous UPI and AP photographers.
Thus even during the golden age, because of printing limitations and the UPI and AP syndication systems, many newspaper photographers labored in relative obscurity.
[edit] Farm Security AdministrationFrom 1935 to 1942, the Farm Security Administration and its predecessor the Resettlement Administration were part of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal, and were designed to address agricultural problems and rural poverty associated with the Great Depression. A special photographic section of the agency, headed by Roy Stryker, was intended merely to provide public relations for its programs, but instead produced what some consider one of the greatest collections[4] of documentary photographs ever created in the U.S. Whether this effort can be called "photojournalism" is debatable, since the FSA photographers had more time and resources to create their work than most photojournalists usually have.
[edit] Acceptance by the art worldSince the late 1970s, photojournalism and documentary photography have increasingly been accorded a place in art galleries alongside fine art photography. Luc Delahaye, VII Photo Agency and Chien-Chi Chang are among many who regularly exhibit in galleries.
[edit] Professional organizationsThe Danish Union of Press Photographers (Pressefotografforbundet) was the first national organization for newspaper photographers in the world. It was founded in 1912 in Denmark by six press photographers in Copenhagen.[5] Today it has over 800 members.
The National Press Photographers Association (NPPA) was founded in 1946 in the U.S., and has about 10,000 members. Others around the world include the British Press Photographers Association (BPPA) founded in 1984, then relaunched in 2003, and now has around 450 members. Hong Kong Press Photographers Association (1989), Northern Ireland Press Photographers Association (2000), Pressfotografernas Klubb (Sweden, 1930), and PK — Pressefotografenes Klubb (Norway).[6]
News organisations and journalism schools run many different awards for photojournalists. Since 1968, Pulitzer Prizes have been awarded for the following categories of photojournalism: 'Feature Photography', 'Spot News Photography'. Other awards are World Press Photo, Best of Photojournalism, and Pictures of the Year as well as the UK based The Press Photographer's Year[7]
[edit] Ethical and legal considerationsPhotojournalism works within the same ethical approaches to objectivity that are applied by other journalists. What to shoot, how to frame and how to edit are constant considerations.
Often, ethical conflicts can be mitigated or enhanced by the actions of a sub-editor or picture editor, who takes control of the images once they have been delivered to the news organization. The photojournalist often has no control as to how images are ultimately used.
The emergence of digital photography offers whole new realms of opportunity for the manipulation, reproduction, and transmission of images. It has inevitably complicated many of the ethical issues involved.
The U.S. National Press Photographers Association, and other professional organizations, maintain codes of ethics to specify approaches to these issues.[8]
Major ethical issues are often inscribed with more or less success into law. Laws regarding photography can vary significantly from nation to nation. The legal situation is further complicated when one considers that photojournalism made in one country will often be published in many other countries.
[edit] The impact of new technologiesSmaller, lighter cameras greatly enhanced the role of the photojournalist. Since the 1960s, motor drives, electronic flash, auto-focus, better lenses and other camera enhancements have made picture taking easier. New digital cameras free photojournalists from the limitation of film roll length, as thousands of images can be stored on a single microdrive or memory card.
Content remains the most important element of photojournalism, but the ability to extend deadlines with rapid gathering and editing of images has brought significant changes. As recently as 15 years ago, nearly 30 minutes were needed to scan and transmit a single color photograph from a remote location to a news office for printing. Now, equipped with a digital camera, a mobile phone and a laptop computer, a photojournalist can send a high-quality image in minutes, even seconds after an event occurs. Video phones and portable satellite links increasingly allow for the mobile transmission of images from almost any point on the earth.
There is some concern by news photographers that the profession of photojournalism as it is known today could change to such a degree that it is unrecognizable as image-capturing technology naturally progresses. There is also concern that fewer print publications are commissioning serious photojournalism on timely issues.
More about journalism
Community journalism is locally oriented coverage that typically focuses on city neighborhoods or individual suburbs rather than metropolitan, state, national or world news.
If it covers those topics, community journalism concentrates on their effect on local readers. Community newspapers, often but not always published weekly, also tend to cover subjects larger news media do not, such as students on the honor roll at the local high school, school sports, crimes such as vandalism, zoning issues and the other details of community life. Some dismiss these as "chicken dinner" stories, but such "hyperlocal" coverage can play a vital role in building and maintaining neighborhoods.
Leo Lerner, founder of Chicago's erstwhile Lerner Newspapers, was wont to say, "A fistfight on Clark Street is more important to our readers than a war in Europe."
The International Society of Weekly Newspaper Editors, which has 260 members in seven countries (U.S., Canada, U.K., Ireland, Japan, Australia, New Zealand), encourages and promotes independent editorial comment, news content, and leadership in community newspapers throughout the world. Its purpose is to help those involved in the community press improve standards of editorial writing and news reporting and to encourage strong, independent editorial voices.
An increasing number of community newspapers are now owned by newspaper groups who realize that these papers can be quite profitable, although many rural papers are still "mom and pop" operations.
Advocacy journalism
Advocacy journalism is a genre of journalism that intentionally and transparently adopts a non-objective viewpoint, usually for some social or political purpose. It is distinguished from propaganda, in that it is intended to be factual, and is usually produced by private media outlets (as opposed to governments). It is also distinct from instances of media bias and failures of objectivity in media outlets which are attempting to be or which present themselves as objective or neutral.
Traditionally, advocacy and criticism are restricted to editorial and op-ed pages, which are clearly distinguished in the publication and in the organization's internal structure. News reports are intended to be objective and unbiased. In contrast, advocacy journalists have an opinion about the story they are writing. For example, that political corruption should be punished, that more environmentally friendly practices should be adopted by consumers, or that a government policy will be harmful to business interests and should not be adopted. This may be evident in small ways, such as tone or facial expression, or large ways, such as the selection of facts and opinions presented.
Some advocacy journalists reject that the traditional ideal of objectivity is possible in practice, either generally, or due to the presence of corporate sponsors in advertising. Some feel that the public interest is better served by a diversity of media outlets with a variety of transparent points of view, or that advocacy journalism serves a similar role to muckrakers or whistleblowers
Examples
Advocacy journalism is practiced by a broad range of mainstream media outlets and alternative media and special interest publications and programs, but might also apply to a single article in an otherwise-neutral publication, such as political stories in Rolling Stone; there are also "advocacy journals", or "alternative publications", which are marketed to target groups based on their interests or biases, for example:
Print media:
Xover Environment Magazine
The Nation
National Review
Mother Jones
The New Republic
The Economist
The Weekly Standard
L'Humanité
Libération
Charlie Hebdo
Le Canard Enchaîné
Knoxville Voice.
[edit] Perspectives from advocacy journalists
One writer for the "alternative" journalism collaborative, the Independent Media Center, writes the following in a call to action:
Classic tenets of journalism call for objectivity and neutrality. These are antiquated principles no longer universally observed.... We must absolutely not feel bound by them. If we are ever to create meaningful change, advocacy journalism will be the single most crucial element to enable the necessary organizing. It is therefore very important that we learn how to be successful advocacy journalists. For many, this will require a different way of identifying and pursuing goals.1
In an April 2000 address to the Canadian Association of Journalists, Sue Careless gave the following commentary and advice to advocacy journalists, which seeks to establish a common view of what journalistic standards the genre should follow.2
Acknowledge your perspective up front.
Be truthful, accurate, and credible. Don't spread propaganda, don't take quotes or facts out of context, "don't fabricate or falsify", and "don't judge or suppress vital facts or present half-truths"
Don't give your opponents equal time, but don't ignore them, either.
Explore arguments that challenge your perspective, and report embarrassing facts that support the opposition. Ask critical questions of people who agree with you.
Avoid slogans, ranting, and polemics. Instead, "articulate complex issues clearly and carefully."
Be fair and thorough.
Make use of neutral sources to establish facts.
Sue Careless also criticized the mainstream media for unbalanced and politically biased coverage, for economic conflicts of interest, and for neglecting certain public causes. She said that alternative publications have advantages in independence, focus, and access, which make them more effective public-interest advocates than the mainstream media.
[edit] History
This short section requires expansion.
The Crisis, the official magazine of the NAACP, was founded in 1910. It describes itself as inheriting the tradition of advocacy journalism from Freedom's Journal, [1], which began in 1827 as "the first African-American owned and operated newspaper published in the United States."[2]
Muckrakers are often claimed as the professional ancestors of modern advocacy journalists; for example: Nellie Bly, Ida M. Tarbell, Lincoln Steffens, Upton Sinclair, George Seldes, and I.F. Stone.
French newspapers Libération, Charlie Hebdo, Le Canard Enchaîné and L'Humanité all recuse what they consider pseudo-objective journalism for a purposeful explicited political stance on events. They oppose Le Monde neutral style, which doesn't impede it, according to those critics, from dissimulating various events or from abstaining to speak about certain subjects. On the other side, a newspaper like Le Figaro clearly assumes its conservative stance and pool of readers.
[edit] Objectivity
Further information: Objectivity (journalism) and Objectivity (philosophy)
Advocacy journalists may reject the principle of objectivity in their work for several different reasons.
Many believe that there is no such thing as objective reporting, that there will always be some form of implicit bias, whether political, personal, or metaphysical, whether intentional or subconscious. This is not necessarily a rejection of the existence of an objective reality, merely a statement about our inability to report on it in a value-free fashion. This may sound like a radical idea, but many mainstream journalists accept the philosophical idea that pure "objectivity" is impossible, but still seek to minimize bias in their work. Other journalistic standards, such as balance, and neutrality, may be used to describe a more practical kind of "objectivity".
"Alternative" critics often charge that the mainstream's media claims of being "bias free" are harmful because they paper over inevitable (often subconscious) biases. They also argue that media sources claiming to be free of bias often advance certain political ideas which are disguised in a so-called "objective" viewpoint. These critics contend that the mainstream media reinforce majority-held ideas, marginalizing dissent and retarding political and cultural discourse.
The proposed solution is to make biases explicit, with the intention of promoting transparency and self-awareness that better serves media consumers. Advocacy journalists often assume that their audiences will share their biases (especially in politically charged alternative media), or will at least be conscious of them while evaluating what are supposed to be well-researched and persuasive arguments.
Some who believe that objective (or balanced, neutral, etc.) reporting is possible, or that it is a laudable goal, do not find that striving for objectivity is always an appropriate goal, perhaps depending on the publication and the purpose at hand. For example, it might be argued that when attempting to expose a waste, corruption, or abuse, a neutral position would "get in the way" of the exposition, and a "bias" against this kind of criminal activity would be quite acceptable to the intended audience.
Many advocacy journalists claim that they can reject objectivity while holding on to the goals of fairness and accuracy, and claim that corporate journalists often lack both.
[edit] Investigative reporting
In some instances, advocacy journalism is the same as investigative journalism and muckraking, where these serve the public interest and the public's right to know. Investigative reports often focus on criminal or unethical activity, or aim to advance a generally accepted public interest, such as government accountability, alleviation of human suffering, etc. It might be argued that the journalist is assuming a point of view that public action is warranted to change the situation being described. The most famous example of this was Edward R. Murrow's 'See it Now' series of reports on Sen. Joseph McCarthy.
[edit] Criticism of advocacy journalism
Professional journalists and members of the public critical of the term assert that reporting without objectivity (termed "editorializing" or "sensationalizing") is bad journalism, and does not serve the public interest.[citation needed]
The term might also indicate a serious breach of journalistic canons and standards, such as rumor mongering, yellow journalism, sensationalism or other ethically flawed reportage[citation needed] — for example, the 2004 revelations created by a press leak in the Plame affair, where a leak was alleged to be used to help an office holder's political position. (However, a critic of that politician, publicly admitted to being the source of that leak, not the politician in question. [1])
Some fear the activity of "advocacy journalists" will be harmful to the reputation of the mainstream press as an objective, reliable source of information. Another concern is that undiscriminating readers will accept the facts and opinions advanced in advocacy pieces as if they were objective and representative, becoming unknowingly and perhaps dangerously misinformed as a result.
Advocacy journalists vary in their response to these criticisms. Some believe that mainstream and "alternative" outlets serve different purposes, and sometimes different audiences entirely, and that the difference is readily apparent to the public.[citation needed] Many believe that the mainstream press is not an objective and reliable source of information, and so doesn't deserve the reputation it seeks to maintain
Freedom of the press.
Freedom of the press is the guarantee by a government of free public press for its citizens and their associations, extended to members of news-gathering organizations (journalists), and their published reporting. It also extends to news gathering, and processes involved in obtaining information for public distribution. In many countries there are constitutional or statutory protections pertaining to freedom of the press.
With respect to governmental information, a government distinguishes which materials are public or protected from disclosure to the public based on classification of information as sensitive, classified or secret and being otherwise protected from disclosure due to relevance of the information to protecting the national interest. Many governments are also subject to sunshine laws or freedom of information legislation that are used to define the ambit of national interest.
Political freedom is the absence of interference with the sovereignty of an individual by the use of coercion or aggression. The members of a free society would have full dominion over their public and private lives. The opposite of a free society would be a totalitarian state, which highly restricts political freedom in order to regulate almost every aspect of behavior. In this sense ‘freedom’ refers solely to the relation of men to other men, and the only infringement on it is coercion by men.[1]
The concept of political freedom is closely allied with the concepts of civil liberties and individual rights. Most democratic societies are professedly characterized by various freedoms which are afforded the legal protection of the state. Some of these freedoms may include (in alphabetical order):
Anarchism
Freedom of assembly
Freedom of association
Freedom to bear arms
Freedom of education
Freedom of movement
Freedom of the press
Freedom of religion
Freedom of speech
Freedom of thought
Intellectual freedom
Sexual freedom
Stochastic
[edit] Views
Various groups along the political spectrum naturally differ on what they believe constitutes "true" political freedom. Friedrich Hayek famously noted that "liberty" and "freedom" have probably been the most abused words in recent history today.
Milton Friedman observed that:
The essence of political freedom is the absence of coercion of one man by his fellow men. The fundamental danger to political freedom is the concentration of power. The existence of a large measure of power in the hands of a relatively few individuals enables them to use it to coerce their fellow men. Preservation of freedom requires either the elimination of power where that is possible or its dispersal where it cannot be eliminated.[2]
Those on the political left define freedom as the ability of the individual to realize one's own potential and pursuit of happiness. Freedom in this sense may include freedom from want, poverty, deprivation, or oppression.
However Friedrich Hayek criticized this as a misconception of freedom:
the use of ‘liberty’ to describe the physical ‘ability to do what I want’, the power to satisfy our wishes, or the extent of the choice of alternatives open to us...has been deliberately fostered as part of the socialist argument... Once this identification of freedom with power is admitted, there is no limit to the sophisms by which the attractions of the word ‘liberty’ can be used to support measures which destroy individual liberty, no end to the tricks by which people can be exhorted in the name of liberty to give up their liberty. It has been with the help of this equivocation that the notion of collective power over circumstances has been substituted for that of individual liberty and that in totalitarian states liberty has been suppressed in the name of liberty.[3]
Many social anarchists see negative and positive liberty as complementary concepts of freedom.
Some treat freedom as if it were almost synonymous with democracy, while others see conflicts or even opposition between the two concepts. For example, some people argue that Iraq was free under Paul Bremer on the grounds that it was a rational, humanist, non-subjugating government, long before elections were held[citation needed]. Others have argued that Iraq was free under Saddam Hussein because Iraq was not a colony[citation needed], while a third claim is that neither Dictatorial nor Colonial rule in Iraq are examples of political freedom.
Environmentalists often argue that political freedoms should include some constraint on use of ecosystems. They maintain there is no such thing, for instance, as "freedom to pollute" or "freedom to deforest" given that such activities create negative externalities. The popularity of SUVs, golf, and urban sprawl has been used as evidence that some ideas of freedom and ecological conservation can clash. This leads at times to serious confrontations and clashes of values reflected in advertising campaigns, e.g. that of PETA regarding fur.
There have been numerous philosophical debates over the nature of freedom, the claimed differences between various types of freedom, and the extent to which freedom is desirable. Determinists argue that all human actions are pre-determined and thus freedom is an illusion. Isaiah Berlin saw a distinction between negative liberty and positive liberty.
In jurisprudence, freedom is the right to determine one's own actions autonomously ; generally it is granted in those fields in which the subject has no obligations to fulfill or laws to obey, according to the interpretation that the hypothetical natural unlimited freedom is limited by the law for some matters.
Freedom in politics is generally used as a governing tool. "For what we call freedom is given only to those who obey, it is then when you stand for what you believe and fight back against oppression you lose those freedoms, and when what is taken away should be your inalienable rights what choice does one have but to obey?" - Joseph Garcia
If it covers those topics, community journalism concentrates on their effect on local readers. Community newspapers, often but not always published weekly, also tend to cover subjects larger news media do not, such as students on the honor roll at the local high school, school sports, crimes such as vandalism, zoning issues and the other details of community life. Some dismiss these as "chicken dinner" stories, but such "hyperlocal" coverage can play a vital role in building and maintaining neighborhoods.
Leo Lerner, founder of Chicago's erstwhile Lerner Newspapers, was wont to say, "A fistfight on Clark Street is more important to our readers than a war in Europe."
The International Society of Weekly Newspaper Editors, which has 260 members in seven countries (U.S., Canada, U.K., Ireland, Japan, Australia, New Zealand), encourages and promotes independent editorial comment, news content, and leadership in community newspapers throughout the world. Its purpose is to help those involved in the community press improve standards of editorial writing and news reporting and to encourage strong, independent editorial voices.
An increasing number of community newspapers are now owned by newspaper groups who realize that these papers can be quite profitable, although many rural papers are still "mom and pop" operations.
Advocacy journalism
Advocacy journalism is a genre of journalism that intentionally and transparently adopts a non-objective viewpoint, usually for some social or political purpose. It is distinguished from propaganda, in that it is intended to be factual, and is usually produced by private media outlets (as opposed to governments). It is also distinct from instances of media bias and failures of objectivity in media outlets which are attempting to be or which present themselves as objective or neutral.
Traditionally, advocacy and criticism are restricted to editorial and op-ed pages, which are clearly distinguished in the publication and in the organization's internal structure. News reports are intended to be objective and unbiased. In contrast, advocacy journalists have an opinion about the story they are writing. For example, that political corruption should be punished, that more environmentally friendly practices should be adopted by consumers, or that a government policy will be harmful to business interests and should not be adopted. This may be evident in small ways, such as tone or facial expression, or large ways, such as the selection of facts and opinions presented.
Some advocacy journalists reject that the traditional ideal of objectivity is possible in practice, either generally, or due to the presence of corporate sponsors in advertising. Some feel that the public interest is better served by a diversity of media outlets with a variety of transparent points of view, or that advocacy journalism serves a similar role to muckrakers or whistleblowers
Examples
Advocacy journalism is practiced by a broad range of mainstream media outlets and alternative media and special interest publications and programs, but might also apply to a single article in an otherwise-neutral publication, such as political stories in Rolling Stone; there are also "advocacy journals", or "alternative publications", which are marketed to target groups based on their interests or biases, for example:
Print media:
Xover Environment Magazine
The Nation
National Review
Mother Jones
The New Republic
The Economist
The Weekly Standard
L'Humanité
Libération
Charlie Hebdo
Le Canard Enchaîné
Knoxville Voice.
[edit] Perspectives from advocacy journalists
One writer for the "alternative" journalism collaborative, the Independent Media Center, writes the following in a call to action:
Classic tenets of journalism call for objectivity and neutrality. These are antiquated principles no longer universally observed.... We must absolutely not feel bound by them. If we are ever to create meaningful change, advocacy journalism will be the single most crucial element to enable the necessary organizing. It is therefore very important that we learn how to be successful advocacy journalists. For many, this will require a different way of identifying and pursuing goals.1
In an April 2000 address to the Canadian Association of Journalists, Sue Careless gave the following commentary and advice to advocacy journalists, which seeks to establish a common view of what journalistic standards the genre should follow.2
Acknowledge your perspective up front.
Be truthful, accurate, and credible. Don't spread propaganda, don't take quotes or facts out of context, "don't fabricate or falsify", and "don't judge or suppress vital facts or present half-truths"
Don't give your opponents equal time, but don't ignore them, either.
Explore arguments that challenge your perspective, and report embarrassing facts that support the opposition. Ask critical questions of people who agree with you.
Avoid slogans, ranting, and polemics. Instead, "articulate complex issues clearly and carefully."
Be fair and thorough.
Make use of neutral sources to establish facts.
Sue Careless also criticized the mainstream media for unbalanced and politically biased coverage, for economic conflicts of interest, and for neglecting certain public causes. She said that alternative publications have advantages in independence, focus, and access, which make them more effective public-interest advocates than the mainstream media.
[edit] History
This short section requires expansion.
The Crisis, the official magazine of the NAACP, was founded in 1910. It describes itself as inheriting the tradition of advocacy journalism from Freedom's Journal, [1], which began in 1827 as "the first African-American owned and operated newspaper published in the United States."[2]
Muckrakers are often claimed as the professional ancestors of modern advocacy journalists; for example: Nellie Bly, Ida M. Tarbell, Lincoln Steffens, Upton Sinclair, George Seldes, and I.F. Stone.
French newspapers Libération, Charlie Hebdo, Le Canard Enchaîné and L'Humanité all recuse what they consider pseudo-objective journalism for a purposeful explicited political stance on events. They oppose Le Monde neutral style, which doesn't impede it, according to those critics, from dissimulating various events or from abstaining to speak about certain subjects. On the other side, a newspaper like Le Figaro clearly assumes its conservative stance and pool of readers.
[edit] Objectivity
Further information: Objectivity (journalism) and Objectivity (philosophy)
Advocacy journalists may reject the principle of objectivity in their work for several different reasons.
Many believe that there is no such thing as objective reporting, that there will always be some form of implicit bias, whether political, personal, or metaphysical, whether intentional or subconscious. This is not necessarily a rejection of the existence of an objective reality, merely a statement about our inability to report on it in a value-free fashion. This may sound like a radical idea, but many mainstream journalists accept the philosophical idea that pure "objectivity" is impossible, but still seek to minimize bias in their work. Other journalistic standards, such as balance, and neutrality, may be used to describe a more practical kind of "objectivity".
"Alternative" critics often charge that the mainstream's media claims of being "bias free" are harmful because they paper over inevitable (often subconscious) biases. They also argue that media sources claiming to be free of bias often advance certain political ideas which are disguised in a so-called "objective" viewpoint. These critics contend that the mainstream media reinforce majority-held ideas, marginalizing dissent and retarding political and cultural discourse.
The proposed solution is to make biases explicit, with the intention of promoting transparency and self-awareness that better serves media consumers. Advocacy journalists often assume that their audiences will share their biases (especially in politically charged alternative media), or will at least be conscious of them while evaluating what are supposed to be well-researched and persuasive arguments.
Some who believe that objective (or balanced, neutral, etc.) reporting is possible, or that it is a laudable goal, do not find that striving for objectivity is always an appropriate goal, perhaps depending on the publication and the purpose at hand. For example, it might be argued that when attempting to expose a waste, corruption, or abuse, a neutral position would "get in the way" of the exposition, and a "bias" against this kind of criminal activity would be quite acceptable to the intended audience.
Many advocacy journalists claim that they can reject objectivity while holding on to the goals of fairness and accuracy, and claim that corporate journalists often lack both.
[edit] Investigative reporting
In some instances, advocacy journalism is the same as investigative journalism and muckraking, where these serve the public interest and the public's right to know. Investigative reports often focus on criminal or unethical activity, or aim to advance a generally accepted public interest, such as government accountability, alleviation of human suffering, etc. It might be argued that the journalist is assuming a point of view that public action is warranted to change the situation being described. The most famous example of this was Edward R. Murrow's 'See it Now' series of reports on Sen. Joseph McCarthy.
[edit] Criticism of advocacy journalism
Professional journalists and members of the public critical of the term assert that reporting without objectivity (termed "editorializing" or "sensationalizing") is bad journalism, and does not serve the public interest.[citation needed]
The term might also indicate a serious breach of journalistic canons and standards, such as rumor mongering, yellow journalism, sensationalism or other ethically flawed reportage[citation needed] — for example, the 2004 revelations created by a press leak in the Plame affair, where a leak was alleged to be used to help an office holder's political position. (However, a critic of that politician, publicly admitted to being the source of that leak, not the politician in question. [1])
Some fear the activity of "advocacy journalists" will be harmful to the reputation of the mainstream press as an objective, reliable source of information. Another concern is that undiscriminating readers will accept the facts and opinions advanced in advocacy pieces as if they were objective and representative, becoming unknowingly and perhaps dangerously misinformed as a result.
Advocacy journalists vary in their response to these criticisms. Some believe that mainstream and "alternative" outlets serve different purposes, and sometimes different audiences entirely, and that the difference is readily apparent to the public.[citation needed] Many believe that the mainstream press is not an objective and reliable source of information, and so doesn't deserve the reputation it seeks to maintain
Freedom of the press.
Freedom of the press is the guarantee by a government of free public press for its citizens and their associations, extended to members of news-gathering organizations (journalists), and their published reporting. It also extends to news gathering, and processes involved in obtaining information for public distribution. In many countries there are constitutional or statutory protections pertaining to freedom of the press.
With respect to governmental information, a government distinguishes which materials are public or protected from disclosure to the public based on classification of information as sensitive, classified or secret and being otherwise protected from disclosure due to relevance of the information to protecting the national interest. Many governments are also subject to sunshine laws or freedom of information legislation that are used to define the ambit of national interest.
Political freedom is the absence of interference with the sovereignty of an individual by the use of coercion or aggression. The members of a free society would have full dominion over their public and private lives. The opposite of a free society would be a totalitarian state, which highly restricts political freedom in order to regulate almost every aspect of behavior. In this sense ‘freedom’ refers solely to the relation of men to other men, and the only infringement on it is coercion by men.[1]
The concept of political freedom is closely allied with the concepts of civil liberties and individual rights. Most democratic societies are professedly characterized by various freedoms which are afforded the legal protection of the state. Some of these freedoms may include (in alphabetical order):
Anarchism
Freedom of assembly
Freedom of association
Freedom to bear arms
Freedom of education
Freedom of movement
Freedom of the press
Freedom of religion
Freedom of speech
Freedom of thought
Intellectual freedom
Sexual freedom
Stochastic
[edit] Views
Various groups along the political spectrum naturally differ on what they believe constitutes "true" political freedom. Friedrich Hayek famously noted that "liberty" and "freedom" have probably been the most abused words in recent history today.
Milton Friedman observed that:
The essence of political freedom is the absence of coercion of one man by his fellow men. The fundamental danger to political freedom is the concentration of power. The existence of a large measure of power in the hands of a relatively few individuals enables them to use it to coerce their fellow men. Preservation of freedom requires either the elimination of power where that is possible or its dispersal where it cannot be eliminated.[2]
Those on the political left define freedom as the ability of the individual to realize one's own potential and pursuit of happiness. Freedom in this sense may include freedom from want, poverty, deprivation, or oppression.
However Friedrich Hayek criticized this as a misconception of freedom:
the use of ‘liberty’ to describe the physical ‘ability to do what I want’, the power to satisfy our wishes, or the extent of the choice of alternatives open to us...has been deliberately fostered as part of the socialist argument... Once this identification of freedom with power is admitted, there is no limit to the sophisms by which the attractions of the word ‘liberty’ can be used to support measures which destroy individual liberty, no end to the tricks by which people can be exhorted in the name of liberty to give up their liberty. It has been with the help of this equivocation that the notion of collective power over circumstances has been substituted for that of individual liberty and that in totalitarian states liberty has been suppressed in the name of liberty.[3]
Many social anarchists see negative and positive liberty as complementary concepts of freedom.
Some treat freedom as if it were almost synonymous with democracy, while others see conflicts or even opposition between the two concepts. For example, some people argue that Iraq was free under Paul Bremer on the grounds that it was a rational, humanist, non-subjugating government, long before elections were held[citation needed]. Others have argued that Iraq was free under Saddam Hussein because Iraq was not a colony[citation needed], while a third claim is that neither Dictatorial nor Colonial rule in Iraq are examples of political freedom.
Environmentalists often argue that political freedoms should include some constraint on use of ecosystems. They maintain there is no such thing, for instance, as "freedom to pollute" or "freedom to deforest" given that such activities create negative externalities. The popularity of SUVs, golf, and urban sprawl has been used as evidence that some ideas of freedom and ecological conservation can clash. This leads at times to serious confrontations and clashes of values reflected in advertising campaigns, e.g. that of PETA regarding fur.
There have been numerous philosophical debates over the nature of freedom, the claimed differences between various types of freedom, and the extent to which freedom is desirable. Determinists argue that all human actions are pre-determined and thus freedom is an illusion. Isaiah Berlin saw a distinction between negative liberty and positive liberty.
In jurisprudence, freedom is the right to determine one's own actions autonomously ; generally it is granted in those fields in which the subject has no obligations to fulfill or laws to obey, according to the interpretation that the hypothetical natural unlimited freedom is limited by the law for some matters.
Freedom in politics is generally used as a governing tool. "For what we call freedom is given only to those who obey, it is then when you stand for what you believe and fight back against oppression you lose those freedoms, and when what is taken away should be your inalienable rights what choice does one have but to obey?" - Joseph Garcia
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)