Journalism in the Digital age

This is usually the part where I begin with a long introduction, but instead I'll let Edward R. Murrow do the talking.

In this journal, we shall discuss how journalism is evolving with the advent of digital media, and the positive and negative effects it has on the world.

One of the great advantages of being a journalist in this country is the freedom of the press that is guaranteed by the first amendment. In fact journalists are technically not bound by law in terms of press coverage, only the ethics of journalism. At it's core journalism ethics mainly dictate that stories be presented accurately, and without any bias or "spin" for one side of the argument. Libel and Slander (the spread of false information with the intent to damage the reputation and/or credibility of someone) are also looked down upon harshly.

The reason why journalism ethics are supposed to be followed to the letter is to avoid "yellow journalism." Yellow journalism is where stories have details exaggerated and/or falsified entirely for the sake of selling newspapers. William Randolph Hearst is the most notable example, with his seemingly blatant disregard for journalism ethics (for the sake of destroying his rival Joseph Pulitzer) actually leading the United States into a war with Spain. Hearst is (not surprisingly) the basis for the character of Charles Foster Kane in Orson Welles' Citizen Kane (Hearst was so enraged by the obvious parody of him that he actually attempted to bribe MGM into destroying the film print).


But hey, it's 2010. Hasn't journalism progressed beyond that? Well in a way, no. The newscasters on the major networks have at times held more sway over popular opinion than the government. Walter Cronkite was able to almost completely eliminate support for the Vietnam war in just a single broadcast. More people know the names of the local NBC and FOX stations than the members of the Detroit city council (the ones that haven't fucked up that is). Despite the almost constant exposure of these personalities to the general public, journalism ethics continue to be subverted. It doesn't happen much on the local stations because they're exposure is rather limited, and they give most attention to local stories, but on the 24 hour cable news networks it becomes more apparent. The most infamous example is FOX News, with it's center-right bias, and MSNBC and CNN have recently developed a left-wing bias that is equal to (if not greater than) FOX.

Why is there so much bias in journalism? It's mainly an unintended side-effect that is often exploited when a news agency is deliberately trying to broadcast a specific agenda. A friend of mine, Greg Bowman, is an anchorman for WWJ, a local radio affiliate of CBS (who's famous eye is at the right of your screen, staring into your soul). In an interview that I conducted for my journalism class in 11th grade, Bowman stressed that being truly objective was impossible, because everyone has their own history and opinions about a story. For this reason interviews done by the local stations are usually short, in order to keep some objectivity in their broadcasts.

Okay enough exposition, let's talk about journalism in the new age. The advent of the internet has now allowed the news networks to increase their audience to virtually the whole world. The major networks have YouTube channels, as well as some international agencies like the BBC, one of the most trusted broadcasting services in the world. But in addition to the growing presence of the networks, we have a new type of journalism: citizen journalism.

Citizen journalism is what it sounds like. Citizens the world over can now be journalists without the need of a network or a nice haircut. They don't have to cover world events, just something simple like a local city hall meeting, or a high school football game. They would write an article about it and post it on a blog not altogether different from this one. If covering the news isn't their thing, they can fact-check articles from other agencies, pointing out errors or evidence of bias. Sometimes people are citizen journalists without even knowing it, especially when a major event is going down. On 9/11 countless people took images of that horrible day, and those were broadcast around the globe by the networks. In 2004 when Sri Lanka was devastated by a tsunami, footage shot by the citizens of the island was also broadcast. In 2009 when Iran went into a virtual media lockdown over protests relating to it's elections, Twitter was used by many to give details about what was happening inside the country.

One of the most unique examples of internet journalism is the Drudge Report, run by Matt Drudge and Andrew Breitbart. Drudge Report (perhaps best known for being the first to break the Monica Lewinsky scandal) is unique in the sense that it does very little reporting, and any reports it does make are based off tips from inside sources. Instead, Drudge links to news articles on other websites, which report on a variety of subjects from politics to sports to entertainment. Drudge Report has a pretty obvious right-wing bias, and it sometimes edits its headlines in a manner similar to yellow journalism, however this is done to make the headlines more noticeable, and not for the sake of misleading.

While this may or may not fit into this category, I believe that it deserves an honorable mention anyway. WikiLeaks can be described as something of an aggressive take on journalism in that it's goal is to publish leaked documents from governments while preserving the anonymity of those involved. The purpose is to allow journalists and to expose unethical and/or illegal practices used by various governments around the world. Since 2007 WikiLeaks has over 1.2 million documents that have been said to be leaked. Some of the more notable ones are the human rights violations at Gitmo, the members list of the far-right British National Party, over 600 internal UN reports, the "climategate" emails, a 32 page DoD intelligence report (which ironically was about WikiLeaks) and most recently, classified video of a 2007 US airstrike in Baghdad that killed 12 people, including two members of the news staff for Reuters.

Murrow began this blog by saying our history will be what we make it. As technology continues to evolve, I predict that journalism will as well. Citizen journalism will become the new norm, which would give a new meaning to "man on the street." The future of journalism ethics is up in the air, especially if there are more networks that are owned by major corporations, like General Electric (MSNBC) and News Corp (FOX News). More sites like WikiLeaks will appear, especially in areas where the government controls the media, and therefore the news. The freedom of the press is both a benefit and a threat, in that our reporters can give us the real story about what is happening in the world, but at the same time a single broadcast can topple a government.

William Randolph Hearst once said "You provide the pictures, I'll provide the war." Today anyone can provide the pictures and the war, what matters now is how we use the pictures to present the war to the world. The press can serve either the interests of the governments, the interests of the people, or the interests of itself. No matter which option it chooses though, there will be hell to pay for the losers.

Good Night, and Good Luck.


References

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cfwsfGqgPM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism_ethics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Randolph_Hearst

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/the-greatest-story-ever-told-sixty-years-of-citizen-kane-682857.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_Journalism

http://www.drudgereport.com/

http://wikileaks.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikileaks

All pictures licensed through creative commons.