Right off the bat, I should clarify that I am an old-school journalist. Printer's ink runs through my veins. I came by my training the hard way, with the seat of my pants firmly planted in front of an old Underwood typewriter on a battle-scarred, institutional gray metal desk occupied by countless others before me -- rewrite after rewrite, learning from my errors which were plenty and developing a thick skin as a defense mechanism against an editor's sharp barbs and critiques.
My bible was always the Canadian Press Style Guide -- authoritative, principled, sometimes capricious, a mixture of sombre injunctions and practical rules. My friend, oddly enough, suggests that "journalists do not make the rules". Of course they don't, but they sure as hell are required to live by them; otherwise risking losing their jobs. The fundamentals of good journalism are constant -- a sharp eye, an inquiring mind, a passion for accurate information and appropriate words...and working long hours any time of the day or night.
Now here's where the general perception of journalism goes a bit awry. Someone has said that the difference between a journalist and a reporter is a little like the difference between a police officer and a homicide detective; the second is just a specific instance of the first. While there are many different kinds of careers in journalism, a reporter's job covers a narrower scope and requires a specific skill set.
There is some controversy, however, about the precise definition of the term "journalist". For the uninitiated, a journalists is somebody who gathers and disseminates information on public affairs, usually for a newspaper or periodical publication, a news broadcast, or for some other electronic form of distribution. While this definition clearly includes the role of reporter, other information workers such as editors, news anchors, publishers, columnists and opinion writers are also considered journalists. (My friend, incidentally, tends to give more credence to columnists and opinion writers, especially those who embrace his particular stance, or bias, on a given subject. He claims to enjoy differences of opinion which is perfectly understandable...To each, his own. I, on the other hand, line up behind good straightforward news reporting from which I form my own opinions.)
It should be understood that a reporter has a more specific function within the realm of journalism. Reporters are usually engaged in the direct gathering and communication of public information, usually through primary information sources such as first-person interviews, news conferences and attendance at news events. The material they communicate is usually -- but not always -- limited to the facts they have gathered; editorializing or sharing opinions on the news is not considered part of the reporter's role.
More so than most other journalists, reporters must be able to develop and locate their own sources of information. They must be able to work quickly; usually reporters work under deadline pressure, and some must meet multiple deadlines per day. Reporters must be able to keep accurate notes and record information faithfully. As eyewitnesses to events, it is their perceptions that determine what readers will learn about the news.
Remember too, that reporter journalists are paid to deliver hard and fast news while commentators of all ilks, editorialists and opinion columnists to be specific, are paid to be entertainingly controversial within reason, often flirting with slander. Personally, I shy away from controversy if at all possible and I take unqualified opinion with a degree of reservation. I would dearly prefer that journalism not be all-inclusive, but readily live with the accepted definition of the discipline.
I was initially paid ($40.00 a week) in 1961 to be a cub reporter. It took a good 10 years for me to reach the stage where I was presumed qualified to be paid, in part, for my editorial opinions on a page in the newspaper designated specifically for that purpose. I never once lost sight, however, of my reportorial convictions of fairness and balance and expected the same of my newsroom staff once promoted to management.
The question of who is and is not a journalist has grown thornier with the growth of new information sources such as blogs and podcasts. Journalists were once defined as employees of newspapers, wire services or broadcast news organizations. But the advent of "citizen journalism" -- amateurs who witness events and write about them on the Internet or (heaven help us) impose opinions and biases of their own -- has blurred the lines between the professional journalist and the mere bystander. The question is important, because journalists are provided certain protections, such as the right to conceal the identity of confidential sources, which ordinary citizens are not.
Ordinary citizens now consider that it is their right to say anything they want about public figures and situations in print and on social media and get away with it. Regurgitation of another party's sarcasm, or hiding behind it, has become the accepted norm. In the public relations business we used to refer to it as having someone else chop wood for you. It is my contention, on the other hand, that the core principles of ethical journalism provide an excellent base for everyone who aspires to launch themselves into the public information domain. We all have a responsibility in how we use and present information.
Where I come from you simply do not demean someone publicly, including politicians, as lacking in morals, ignorant, disgraceful, shameful, dishonest (you add your own frequently used adjectives) for effect or without just cause just to buoy your own self esteem and sense of self righteousness. There are those who will argue that public figures are fair game but, I am sorry, it is personally distasteful and below my dignity. I lose respect for those who stoop to such a level.
If people would only realize that the most legitimate opinions can be diminished when accompanied by insults and derogatory remarks. And don't try to tell me that innuendo and sarcasm expressed by Joe Blow from Kokomo ever held anyone to account. While entertaining to some, generally it only contributes to societal unrest and bitterness, even among friends.
There are hundreds of codes of conduct, charters and statements made by media and professional groups outlining the principles, values and obligations of the craft of journalism. Most focus on five common themes: truth and accuracy, independence, fairness and impartiality, humanity and accountability.
My aforementioned friend, who offers well-intended sage advice in urging me to relax and to enjoy the "free" expressions of others, forgets one thing...And that is that there is nothing enjoyable or relaxing in the expressions of others when they are biased, negative, misinformed, insulting, insensitive and downright mean.
I will take my old school communication principles to the grave with me...And if that makes me an unpopular, crotchety, behind-the-times former journalist in a misguided era of speech freedom and personality crucifixion -- then so be it!
When my easy-going, tolerant nature wanes; an attack mode has been known to click in. And it is never pretty.
It should be understood that a reporter has a more specific function within the realm of journalism. Reporters are usually engaged in the direct gathering and communication of public information, usually through primary information sources such as first-person interviews, news conferences and attendance at news events. The material they communicate is usually -- but not always -- limited to the facts they have gathered; editorializing or sharing opinions on the news is not considered part of the reporter's role.
More so than most other journalists, reporters must be able to develop and locate their own sources of information. They must be able to work quickly; usually reporters work under deadline pressure, and some must meet multiple deadlines per day. Reporters must be able to keep accurate notes and record information faithfully. As eyewitnesses to events, it is their perceptions that determine what readers will learn about the news.
Remember too, that reporter journalists are paid to deliver hard and fast news while commentators of all ilks, editorialists and opinion columnists to be specific, are paid to be entertainingly controversial within reason, often flirting with slander. Personally, I shy away from controversy if at all possible and I take unqualified opinion with a degree of reservation. I would dearly prefer that journalism not be all-inclusive, but readily live with the accepted definition of the discipline.
I was initially paid ($40.00 a week) in 1961 to be a cub reporter. It took a good 10 years for me to reach the stage where I was presumed qualified to be paid, in part, for my editorial opinions on a page in the newspaper designated specifically for that purpose. I never once lost sight, however, of my reportorial convictions of fairness and balance and expected the same of my newsroom staff once promoted to management.
The question of who is and is not a journalist has grown thornier with the growth of new information sources such as blogs and podcasts. Journalists were once defined as employees of newspapers, wire services or broadcast news organizations. But the advent of "citizen journalism" -- amateurs who witness events and write about them on the Internet or (heaven help us) impose opinions and biases of their own -- has blurred the lines between the professional journalist and the mere bystander. The question is important, because journalists are provided certain protections, such as the right to conceal the identity of confidential sources, which ordinary citizens are not.
Ordinary citizens now consider that it is their right to say anything they want about public figures and situations in print and on social media and get away with it. Regurgitation of another party's sarcasm, or hiding behind it, has become the accepted norm. In the public relations business we used to refer to it as having someone else chop wood for you. It is my contention, on the other hand, that the core principles of ethical journalism provide an excellent base for everyone who aspires to launch themselves into the public information domain. We all have a responsibility in how we use and present information.
Where I come from you simply do not demean someone publicly, including politicians, as lacking in morals, ignorant, disgraceful, shameful, dishonest (you add your own frequently used adjectives) for effect or without just cause just to buoy your own self esteem and sense of self righteousness. There are those who will argue that public figures are fair game but, I am sorry, it is personally distasteful and below my dignity. I lose respect for those who stoop to such a level.
If people would only realize that the most legitimate opinions can be diminished when accompanied by insults and derogatory remarks. And don't try to tell me that innuendo and sarcasm expressed by Joe Blow from Kokomo ever held anyone to account. While entertaining to some, generally it only contributes to societal unrest and bitterness, even among friends.
There are hundreds of codes of conduct, charters and statements made by media and professional groups outlining the principles, values and obligations of the craft of journalism. Most focus on five common themes: truth and accuracy, independence, fairness and impartiality, humanity and accountability.
My aforementioned friend, who offers well-intended sage advice in urging me to relax and to enjoy the "free" expressions of others, forgets one thing...And that is that there is nothing enjoyable or relaxing in the expressions of others when they are biased, negative, misinformed, insulting, insensitive and downright mean.
I will take my old school communication principles to the grave with me...And if that makes me an unpopular, crotchety, behind-the-times former journalist in a misguided era of speech freedom and personality crucifixion -- then so be it!
When my easy-going, tolerant nature wanes; an attack mode has been known to click in. And it is never pretty.
No comments:
Post a Comment