1. Lippmann wrote that journalists can excel when reporting concrete facts or things that could be measured, such as sports scores and election results. However, Lippmann said that journalists often fail to deliver matters that require knowledge and interpretation, such as conflicts or policies. Lippmann thought journalism was flawed because first, journalists are humans and apt to mistakes, and second everybody interprets the world differently. What a reader understands about an article can be different than another reader. Also, news and truth are not the same thing according to Lippmann. That is because truth has a purpose to explore and expose the unknown into reality, while news has the purpose to make people aware of the unknown, unusual or bizarre. In “Public Opinion,” Lippmann also wrote how journalism is not a science, and that he preferred expert knowledge than public opinion because the press controlled the public opinion creating bias.
2.
…show more content…
The social responsibility theory of the press ensures that a free press delivers the truth alongside with journalistic ethical posture to the readers. The press is responsible of its self-regulation. The Hutchins Commission amplifies that professionalism and responsibility to society are keys for a free press. Owners of the press and those who manage it are the ones responsible to decide if unregulated initiative is tolerable or not. The Rolling Stone magazine article about rape last December do not reflect the social responsibility theory. The article is not accurate and it violates the journalistic code of conduct to check sources. The Rolling Stone should not rely on an outsider for fact-checking as they reported. The people who work at the magazine, especially in high positions such as editor in chief should check the report. Failure in journalistic standards and confirmation bias are not acceptable in the social responsibility
The 2006 Duke Lacrosse Case brought to light many of the issues and divisions currently plaguing our media sphere. This terrible act of injustice, which blamed three innocent Duke lacrosse players, Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty, and David Evans, for the rape of an African-American stripper, garnered extensive media attention that gripped America for almost an entire year (Wasserman, 3). Today, many scrutinze the media’s methods of covering the case, and deem that certain codes of ethics were not adhered to. Rather than remaining neutral, newspapers and TV outlets allowed themselves to “be used” by Mike Nifong, the former District Attorney for Durham and prosecutor of the case, by reporting only his version of the incident and investigation (11). While some newspapers like Newsweek and The News & Observer were relatively quick to recognize flaws in the investigation, many prominent outlets like The New York Times overlooked important evidence and published inaccurate information. In response to this, the Duke Lacrosse Case saw a huge rise in blog reporting, as many sought to uncover the truth. Conclusively, the media overstepped its boundaries when reporting on this particular case, demonstrating the compelling effects sensationalism has on the field of journalism.
The competition in journalism motivates reporters to uncover stories faster than their opposition. A problem occurs when journalists forgo a thorough investigation in order to get their story out quicker. If a story’s accuracy is in question then the credibility of that publication is now at risk. Rolling Stone published an article about a fraternity’s gang rape of a University of Virginia freshman. The story follows the rape victim’s life after the attack and is critical of the university’s actions pertaining to the sexual assault.
398).It is also stated that news divisions reduced their costs, and raised the entertainment factor of the broadcasts put on air. (p. 400). Secondly, the media determines its sources for stories by putting the best journalists on the case and assign them to areas where news worthy stories just emanates. (p.400). Third, the media decides how to present the news by taking the most controversial or relevant events and compressing them into 30 second sound-bites. (p.402). finally, the authors also explain how the media affects the general public. The authors’ state “The effect of one news story on public opinion may be trivial but the cumulative effect of dozens of news stories may be important. This shows a direct correlation between public opinions and what the media may find “relevant”. (Edwards, Wattenberg, Lineberry, 2015, p.
“The old argument that the networks and other ‘media elites’ have a liberal bias is so blatantly true that it’s hardly worth discussing anymore…No we don’t sit around in dark corners and plan strategies on how we’re going to slant the news. We don’t have to. It comes naturally to most reporters.” (Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News) This example is tremendously important in the author’s discussion because it proves that news stories do manipulate people through bias. Popular news networks are viewed by thousands of people every single day, thus making it have a huge impact on the public since they believe what they see. When news reporters present their news segments, it is natural for them to give their insights due to human nature being instinctively biased. “The news media is [sic] only objective if they report something you agree with… Then they’re objective. Otherwise they’re biased if you don’t agree, you know.” (CNN’s American Morning) In this quote, the readers are presented to current panelists agreeing that news consumers have a very hard time separating their own view of the news from the perspective of the news reporters because they are presenting their own opinions throughout their segments. This problem exists once again because of the bias that is contained in media
It is not uncommon to hear people complaining about what they hear on the news. Everyone knows it and the media themselves knows it as well. Some of the most renowned journalists have even covered the the media’s issues in detail. Biased news outlets have flooded everyday news. We find that journalism’s greatest problems lie in the media’s inability for unbiased reporting, the tendency to use the ignorance of their audience to create a story, and their struggles to maintain relevance.
Whether it is through a newspaper, television, magazines or talk radio, people will always communicate through some type of medium. Now, whether or not the mediums are tainted with bias is a question of beliefs. Some people argue that journalism today is rather fair and balanced, while others would vehemently oppose that view by saying that bias is definitely prevalent in news media and other mediums today. In some instances, there lies the belief that the fairness doctrine should be reestablished in order to mend the problem of bias; however, many would strenuously fight that by arguing that such an act would destroy the freedom of the press guaranteed under the first amendment. Another argument surrounding this issue is the expectation of journalists to be as objective to each issue as possible. Contrary to this, people argue that it isn’t possible to be completely objective. Many arguments surround the issue of media bias.
So called “opinion journalism” has become a growing issue in today’s media. The concern is that the news channels are not always reporting facts to their viewers, but often times fact less opinions. In his article “The Truth about TV News”, Westin makes a highly effective argument as to how news channels are reporting opinions rather than cold, hard facts. His persuading argument lists supporting and personal experience. The experience comes from Westin’s time as ABC president has given him a valuable insight into both the industry of reporting and how opinion journalism has become a growing issue. Westin uses his knowledge to support his claim: opinion journalism is bad and needs to be put to rest as fast as possible.
The introduction of the internet to modern society has brought about a new age of information relation. Since there is no longer a need to wait until the next print day, news from all over the world is available at a person’s fingertips within hours or even minutes of the event. With this advent of such easily accessible information, new problems for the news media have also arisen. Aside from potentially losing good economic standing because newspapers are no longer being purchased in the quantities they used to be, the credibility of the information itself is also put into question. No one would argue that credibility of news sources is unimportant, but there is a discrepancy in what takes precedence; economy and speed or getting the information out correctly at the first publishing by taking the time to make sure all facts are checked. The importance of having a system of checks on all information submitted is paramount. People trust what they read and believe it to be so without always questioning. If all information were to not be checked thoroughly, there would be instances where people read an article only for information included to be wrong and they go on believing such information. This can be very dangerous as misinformed people make misinformed decisions. With an increase in errors being made by citizen bloggers and even major publications, many are worried that journalistic ethics and credibility in the news media are being sacrificed in order to maintain swiftness in the news circuit and to retain personal profits. Though getting information to the masses quickly is a major part of the media’s importance, this should not mean that the credibility of that information being presented should be sacrificed for it...
The Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) provides a very clear and thorough Code of Ethics, which serves as a good definition of ethical journalism. According to this code, an ethical journalist must try to minimize any potential harm done to people directly involved with the event being reported. Such a journalist should also act independently of any personal biases, and be responsive to any criticism of their work. Finally, a truly ethical journalist must seek to find and report the truth (Society). Common sense reaffirms these guidelines. When one thinks of ethical behavior, one usually thinks along terms of being truthful, appreciative of others, acting responsively and using fair judgement. All of these concepts are explicitly stated in the SPJ's Code of Ethics.
media) is fundamentally important in understanding the mass media as an agent of those dominant in our society and the forces that motivate them in their exploration of the truth. How to use [IMAGE]? A qualitative analysis of the issues pertaining to journalism and the current Code of Ethics, utilizing information from a variety of different sources to obtain a vast body of knowledge. pertaining to journalism and the current code. Areas of Concern:.
Americans look to the press to provide the information they need to make informed political choices. How well the press lives up to its responsibility to provide this information has a direct impact upon Americans: how they think about and act upon the issues that confront them.
"Journalism Ethics Online Journalism Ethics Gatekeeping." Journalism Ethics for the Global Citizen. Web. 05 Dec. 2010. .
In the document, Media transformation, Ownership and Diversity, the ANC criticises the South African media’s self-regulatory model. The fact that the media are first and foremost corporations is incredibly important. Following the recent decline in print media consumption, journalistic standards have dropped following budget cuts by the corporations. (Duncan, 2014, p. 170) Because of the former self-regulatory model, the ANC were concerned that journalists would not call each other out on lapses of ethical conduct.
In trying to attract new audiences, news media have begun to transition from reporting to becoming a form of entertainment. With the meteoric rise of social media’s role as a news source, the fight for an increase of diversity in the media, and the ever-growing desire of immediate content, the future of responsible journalism is more important than ever. Ask yourself, why do I think the way I do? Where do my political views originate? How do I prove them? Most likely, it is due to the biased portrayal of issues in the media and the politicization that accompanies what we consume. Now, compare your views to your preferred news reporting entity. More than likely, they are the same.
McLoed and Hawley (as cited in Wilson, 1995) elucidated appropriately, "a recurrent journalistic controversy has involved the question whether journalism is a true profession or merely a craft." Sparked primarily by Lippmann and Dewey, extending into the age of the penny press (mid 1980s) and later, the attempt to commercialise the news (late 1980s) to our present era, there has existed a contentious debate on journalism being distinguished as a profession (Wilson, 1995). Encapsulated in a democratic homeland since the advent of time, media systems are habitually acclaimed as the “fourth power,” with its journalists often hailed as the “watch-dogs” of such a society. Lending itself to act as ‘gatekeeper’ for the wider society and performing the traditional role of journalism, the media (overall) exist as powerful “instruments of knowledge” that perform the function of providing information to the masses in a public sphere, where issues may be discussed, justified and contested (Scannell, 1995, p. 17). Evidently, media workers play a pivotal role in our society; however, their status in the realm of professions is not definite.