September 22, 2005
Journalist (and) Businessman?
In "The Elements of Journalism," the authors write, "The bonuses of newsroom executives today are generally based in large part on how much money their companies make in profit." While that doesn't surprise me, "America's journalistic leaders [have] been transformed into business people."
The accuracy of this statement is clearly evident. Dr. Jerz's documentation of the actual amount of News vs. Non-News in a half-hour television news broadcast shows how big a role ratings play. Ratings, that matter not because of, "Journsalism's" first loyalty to citizens," but because of it's newfound relationship with corporate advertising.
It makes sense why people are losing trust in the news.
Posted by DavidDenninger at September 22, 2005 10:08 AM
DO you normally watch the news? If you do, which do you prefer: television, newspaper, or internet?
Posted by: Katie Lambert at September 24, 2005 08:04 PM
I prefer being able to choose what read, when I read it, and to participate in a discussion if I so desire. I guess I like the higher level of interactivity. Besides major news network sites, I like these the best...
www.drudgereport.com (first choice for news-- scroll down in the left column... it has links to every news source ever!)
www.freerepublic.com (highly conservative--its fun to be a rabble rouser)
Posted by: David Denninger at September 25, 2005 04:16 PM
I prefer the internet, too, for conveniance sake. Sometimes the articles seem lacking. For instance, WTAE and the Trib's website seem to only provide a synopsis, rather than the whole story.
Posted by: Katie Lambert at September 25, 2005 07:33 PM
The issue stems from a long history and evolution of the news. The Elements of Journalism points out that the news has evolved--for good or for bad--from the minstrals of the middle ages to the blogging journalists of today.
I think this is one of the downfalls of capitalism--that money or capital is the most important aspect of society. While it's a good ideology, there are many negative consequences. Journalism is an industry and people do need to make money, but I feel this should not be at the price of compromising journalistic values.
At one point, sensationalism (yellow journalism) was big in print journalism (ca. the war against Spain). I can imagine they did this to sell papers and, yet again, history repeats itself: we're out to make a buck.
The trick is the balance: producing the whole truth without going bankrupt.
Posted by: Evan at September 25, 2005 10:53 PM