As the rise of the digital era is starting to fuel the fears about the future of the printed word, many doubt the survival of journalism itself. Even if the press’s future is uncertain, journalism’s can not possibly be.
Those who actually believe that a world without journalism can exist do not understand the meaning of the word itself. The highest social function of journalism is the gathering of factual events and making them available to the public. This is the basis of any democratic society. It is through the information given through journalism that each individual can create his understanding of the facts surrounding him.
Still this is not a definition of journalism for it cannot be fixed and labeled by words. It changes, like a chameleon, according to how people perceive it. It can be a job, a\n obsession, a business or the highest ideal of all. It is for this that the only way of defining journalism is by doing it.
Contrary to popular belief the new technology does not challenge journalism in itself. It actually helps it. Producing journalism has become incredibly simple. Posting a blog or broadcasting a video on YouTube are all forms of journalism.
Certainly the accuracy and credibility of the news is undermined by the advent of user generated content. Anyhow this should not put in doubt the importance of journalism itself. Journalism matters and it should matter to everyone, since, at times our only mean of contact with the world.
Westminster University Professor Hugh Barnes once said: “you wouldn’t want to live in a world without journalism”. For living in a world without information is the
Journalism/2
same as living in a dark hole your entire life. Luckily, the curiosity and the will to communicate are predominant characteristics in mankind and as long that there will be information there will be journalism to report it.
martedì 11 dicembre 2007
mercoledì 14 novembre 2007
Does news show the bright side?
As an information age society we are constantly pesterd by facts. We are told the whole world is at reach of our fingertips.Still there is a branch of it that we are not able to catch.
Media compulsion towards digital conversion is overturning the jounalistic world. Urgency and direct reportage have transformed the business of journalistic inquiry, and the profit imperative has replaced notions of morals and ethics.
Sheer amounts of money that advertising brings to media companies not only pays for the free content, but for the support of the company itself. Bringing massive pressure on editors and reporters to change the content to meet the industries' expectations.
Janine Jackson of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR),told the American Free Press that 60 percent of journalists surveyed by FAIR admit that advertisers "try to change stories."So if the consumerist industries control the content of the news, won't there be a part of the world left out of it?
News is converting into one of the many commodities whose sale and distribution can generate large profits. The discovery of this aspect of news has sparked an inflow of big capital into the media.This year,ZenithOptimedia says, advertisers will spend $448bn worldwide much of it supporting the media.Now there is a wide range of media properties to fight over that money.Hence the media battling over that money establishes the advertisers'controlling position.
Media critic, Ben Bagdikian, describes in detail the pressure on the media companies to change content. The content has to be shaped on the demographic of the audiences. He also shows that the advertisement must be targeted towards readers that can afford those types of products. Therefore it is not "giving the audience what they want"; it is more, giving the advertisers what they want.
As Mr. Bagdikian argues, "An article that puts the reader in an analytical frame of mind does not encourage the reader to take seriously an ad that depends on fantasy or promotes a trivial product". He also hints that this has been going on for a long time.
The Internal "wars" between media groups have become bigger than actual ones. Major teams of special correspondents sweep the world in packs. Journalists are immensely impelled by the competition to get the story in first . This explains why,even when several major events are occuring simultaneously in the world, the media tends to cover only one: the one that attracts the pack.
A Clear example of this is the excessive media coverage on the bluetongue disease.Which caused bearly 40 deaths in the last 4 years. While news about tubercolosis,killing more than 2,000 people each year,is substantially null. Bluetongue disease affects mainly the Occidental countries.While tubercolosis strikes primarly in developing countries.Those populations cannot afford to buy the products advertised by the media. Actually most of them are not even reached by the media.
In many countries TV only broadcasts for two or three hours per day. And in some of Asia’s vaster regions - for instance in Siberia, Kazakhstan and Mongolia - there are TV transmitters but the people have no sets able to receive the programmes.
Issues like these, surely existed even before the "digital era". As erika Milvy suggests"brand-sponsored content' as Steve Golin likes to call this, is as old as television." With the advent of digtal and convergencies this phenomenon is currently in full spate.
This creates a paradoxical situation. On one hand developing means of communication have connected all parts of the planet into a global village; on the other, there is less and less space for international issues in the media.
World's reality is not entirely represented by the media. What is given to us is a fragmented and superficial version of "the whole".As brisbane said"A newspaper is a mirror reflecting the public, a mirror more or less defective, but still a mirror."
Media compulsion towards digital conversion is overturning the jounalistic world. Urgency and direct reportage have transformed the business of journalistic inquiry, and the profit imperative has replaced notions of morals and ethics.
Sheer amounts of money that advertising brings to media companies not only pays for the free content, but for the support of the company itself. Bringing massive pressure on editors and reporters to change the content to meet the industries' expectations.
Janine Jackson of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR),told the American Free Press that 60 percent of journalists surveyed by FAIR admit that advertisers "try to change stories."So if the consumerist industries control the content of the news, won't there be a part of the world left out of it?
News is converting into one of the many commodities whose sale and distribution can generate large profits. The discovery of this aspect of news has sparked an inflow of big capital into the media.This year,ZenithOptimedia says, advertisers will spend $448bn worldwide much of it supporting the media.Now there is a wide range of media properties to fight over that money.Hence the media battling over that money establishes the advertisers'controlling position.
Media critic, Ben Bagdikian, describes in detail the pressure on the media companies to change content. The content has to be shaped on the demographic of the audiences. He also shows that the advertisement must be targeted towards readers that can afford those types of products. Therefore it is not "giving the audience what they want"; it is more, giving the advertisers what they want.
As Mr. Bagdikian argues, "An article that puts the reader in an analytical frame of mind does not encourage the reader to take seriously an ad that depends on fantasy or promotes a trivial product". He also hints that this has been going on for a long time.
The Internal "wars" between media groups have become bigger than actual ones. Major teams of special correspondents sweep the world in packs. Journalists are immensely impelled by the competition to get the story in first . This explains why,even when several major events are occuring simultaneously in the world, the media tends to cover only one: the one that attracts the pack.
A Clear example of this is the excessive media coverage on the bluetongue disease.Which caused bearly 40 deaths in the last 4 years. While news about tubercolosis,killing more than 2,000 people each year,is substantially null. Bluetongue disease affects mainly the Occidental countries.While tubercolosis strikes primarly in developing countries.Those populations cannot afford to buy the products advertised by the media. Actually most of them are not even reached by the media.
In many countries TV only broadcasts for two or three hours per day. And in some of Asia’s vaster regions - for instance in Siberia, Kazakhstan and Mongolia - there are TV transmitters but the people have no sets able to receive the programmes.
Issues like these, surely existed even before the "digital era". As erika Milvy suggests"brand-sponsored content' as Steve Golin likes to call this, is as old as television." With the advent of digtal and convergencies this phenomenon is currently in full spate.
This creates a paradoxical situation. On one hand developing means of communication have connected all parts of the planet into a global village; on the other, there is less and less space for international issues in the media.
World's reality is not entirely represented by the media. What is given to us is a fragmented and superficial version of "the whole".As brisbane said"A newspaper is a mirror reflecting the public, a mirror more or less defective, but still a mirror."
Iscriviti a:
Post (Atom)