Final Question 1

Objectivity is a difficult issue to address in journalism because it means different things to different people. To better understand it, I think of objectivity on two levels—objectivity in reporting-based journalism, and objectivity in opinion-based journalism. In reporting-based journalism, there is a general expectation that stories will be reported with an emphasis on the simple facts of the story, with perhaps only moderate analysis. In this case, the most important feature is clarity. Jeffrey Scheuer says, "It is hard to achieve much certainty, objectivity, or neutrality in any enterprise. . .that involves the use of language. Language itself is a vast, complex array of choices, and choice is the quintessence of subjectivity" (2008, 73). In this instance, journalists should simply try their hardest to use the plainest language available in presenting a story. Opinion-based objectivity is a completely different realm of journalism. Political commentators have fallen under fire recently for their "biased" views of the world and their portrayal of their opinion as fact. However, this is the very nature of their kind of journalism. Here, opinion is perhaps the most interesting and most exciting aspect of journalism and which attracts those who would rather spend their time elsewhere otherwise. As long as such opinions are presented as such, there should be no problem in objectivity. The main issue in both types of objectivity is this: are you acknowledging your biases upfront, or are you cloaking them in an attempt to pass them as fact? Opinionated journalism can surely be objective, since people are able to see them for what they are, and subsequently can view them "objectively."

Final Question 2

Jeffrey Scheuer identifies three aspects of journalism as necessary (but not always sufficient) for

excellent journalism: truth, context, and independence (2008).

Truth, addressed more completely in the next question, is an effort to encompass all of the facts necessary for a story, and to verify those facts. Being able to quickly gather accurate information is the hallmark of an excellent news service. When facts are wrong, the consequences can be grave.

Context involves more of an explanation of the news, and connecting it to larger instances in recent and more distant history. This aspect of journalism introduces much of the likelihood of accusations of bias. Especially reputable journalists can present the context of a news story in a way that both captures the attention of the public and earns their trust.

Independence is perhaps the most interesting aspect of new journalism, especially bloggers and other internet-related journalists. Good journalism is free from partnerships that would otherwise compromise their ability to report critically and accurately on any topic. This is especially possible in new media, especially blogs. When bloggers are able to specialize on a certain aspect of government, entertainment, or the media itself, they are able to more easily investigate and report on their subject. Even the advent of video sites like YouTube have completely changed the way that people communicate and that companies and government are responsible to their constituents.

KHOU.com provided excellent coverage of the city of Houston, most notably during Hurricane Ike. The New York Times even commented on how people all over the United States and all over the world were tuning in to Houston news websites to see live coverage of the effects of the storm. In today's media, KHOU is not only performing for its immediate constituents, it is performing for every single person with a computer or a cell phone. While there were no other large stories, it seems that KHOU had a rather balanced coverage of the city. KHOU consistently wins awards for its coverage.

Final Question 3

Truth is perhaps one of the most debated aspects of journalism, but it often viewed in different ways. Some see truth as merely getting the facts right, but it is also something deeper. Kovach and Rosenstiel offer the following: "Journalistic truth. . .is also more than mere accuracy. It is a sorting-out process that develops between the interaction among the public, newsmakers, and journalists over time. This first principle of journalism—its disinterested pursuit of truth—is ultimately what sets it apart from all other forms of communication" (2001, e9). This idea of truth as a process helps us understand what is most important in journalism. While it is impossible to get every story right every time, truth is more of a pursuit than an actual destination. This may seem a slippery way to avoid an answer, it separates the good journalists from the bad—this consistent pursuit of truth builds credibility and establishes a reputation that is essential for the public to identify sources for information. By becoming a reputable source, the organization or journalist is able to contribute to civic knowledge, enlarging the public's ability to interact with society.

Final Question 4

Simply put, newspapers are failing and television news operations are downsizing because technology has made their formats increasingly obsolete. With media moving from television and print to computers and cell phones, people no longer need to sit down for the 5:30 news or pick up a morning newspaper—everyone already knows. John Koblin's article from the New York Observer puts it well:

"In June, Russ Stanton told MediaBistro that morale was starting to reappear at the paper and that people were 'focused solely on doing great work and good stories and terrific journalism.' And then Sam Zell threw all that out the window the next day. 'What has become clear as we have gotten intimately familiar with the business is that the model for newspapers no longer works,' he said in a memo" (2008

It's no longer a matter of trying hard enough—the traditional way of running a newspaper cannot survive today. Newspapers and local news stations must think outside of the box into a new way to stay afloat.

I don't plan an immediate future in journalism, but eventually I hope to go into political commentary, either online or on the radio. Those industries are adapting to the new way that the public gets the news, so I feel relatively safe in those careers. In the future, I hope to be blogging part-time on political subjects for myself or a small start-up blogging organization.

Final Question 5

I plan to live by a very simple code as a journalist. I don't plan on changing the world through cut-throat reporting, or going to jail to protect a source. I just want to stand on the outside and provide intellectual and searching commentary on the political and pop culture trends of the day. My code is to be straightforward in my opinions, be thorough in my analysis, and to provide the most entertaining and enlightening service to my readers or listeners. I felt like many in the class downplayed the importance of being both an information service and an entertainment to the audience. As much as this may counter others' codes of conduct, I feel like in today's changing media, the boring patterns of today will simply not work tomorrow.

Final Works Cited

WORKS CITED

Koblin, John. 2008. Black and white, red all over: Is 2008 the worst year in modern newspaper history? The New York Observer. 21 July.

Kovach, Bill, and Tom Rosenstiel. 2001. The elements of journalism. New York: Three Rivers Press.

Scheuer, Jeffrey. 2008. The big picture: Why democracies need journalistic excellence. New York: Routledge.

Stelter, Brian. 2008. Houston TV web sites draw world viewers to Ike video. New York Times. 21 September.

We're Sorry!

Both Time Magazine and Newsweek have been criticized during the campaign for being biased towards Barack Obama. They routinely published cover stories of Barack with less-than-critical subject matters. However, after two cover stories about certain aspects of Obama were published, the campaign was less-than-pleased:

Last spring, when Newsweek ran a cover portraying Obama as the elitist “arugula” candidate, followed weeks later by a cover story in which editor Evan Thomas wrote Obama an open memo on dealing with race, the campaign suddenly stopped cooperating with the magazine’s quadrennial book project, which requires behind-the-scenes access. Thomas had to fly to Detroit and try to assuage Gibbs during a campaign flight before access was restored.

“I thought the Obama campaign was overreacting to those two covers,” Thomas says. “They thought we were overly concerned with race.”

Is it just me, or does it seem odd that journalists were coming to the campaign to apologize to them? Shouldn't it be the other way around? If the media are balanced and the watchdogs we assume them to be, it seems unbecoming for such a thing to happen. While the liberal media bias is often laughed at, it is no doubt present to some extent (it happened during times of the Bush administration as well). It will be interesting to see how the media's relationship with the Obama administration develops over the next year.