As a journalist, I have made an oberservation: Journalists have an expectation that everyone will do an interview.
People, of course, have the right to refuse interviews. When they do, I've seen plenty of journalists get irrate. Journalists won't easily take "no" for an answer.
A lot of journalists feel they are entitled to information and a person's story. Democracy, afterall, is built on freedom of information. It is also built on the right to say "no."
While I respect a person's right to say "no," it certainly messes up a story. For instance, say when you lose the "other side's" perspective because of a refusal to do an interview. When people say the media is one-sided, well, sometimes that's because the "other side" doesn't want to talk. What's a journalist to do? One side is better than no sides.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Democracy is actually built on the freedom to own property, end of story(!). As for one-sidedness, we all know "balance" takes a lot more work than simply transcribing two opposing views onto a piece of paper, he said/she said bullshoot. Time, history, analysis...people who can't achieve, or don't believe they can achieve, an objective perspective on things shouldn't be writing "journalism".
Yes. Analysis is important, but I don't think it should come from the journalist... it should come from a nutural "outside" expert.
And I do think you can have a story that ends up one-sided that was reported on objectivelly... although whether or not those one-sided stories should be pulled is another matter.
I think it's a journalist's job to do way more than simply steer a story between two different sources' probable bullsh~t talking points. Historical analysis is a journalists job, to give the story perspective, purpose, credibility. -Fez
Fez,
The reporter just reports. A columnist can analyze and weigh in on the issue in an educated manner.
Agreed. A journalist reports, an analyst analyzes. I think it's a journalist's responsibility to do the job well - that is, to get the right information from a variety of sources. Journalists should think critically and include the information that presents the best possible view, but that's the invisible work that goes into what you see on the page.
I think Fez has a point, though. There's a perceived lack of credibility with journalists these days, and it has a lot to do with budget and staffing cuts in newsrooms. And there are institutional biases against reporting certain things or presenting certain points of view.
Budget and staffing cuts certainly have an effect on the quality of the news. When you have few reporters, it's hard enough to cover the day to day stuff. ie). press conferences. It doesn't leave time for investigative pieces, which is sad.
Post a Comment