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.

National Security vs. Public Disclosure

The New York Times reported today that the United States government has been conducting secret raids on Al-Qaeda operatives in countries all around the world without the knowledge of much of the government. Since 2004, the military has been involved in these operations.

How does this involve a question on journalism? How long has the Times known about this story? Many may wonder whether this knowledge will now prevent the effectiveness of such operations in the future. Which was more important in this case--the public disclosure, or national security. This story is obviously not as groundbreaking as the wiretapping case a few years ago, but it raises similar questions.

I personally believe that editors-in-chief of major newspapers need to be the best of the best and absolutely without political affinity for either party. If we can trust these gatekeepers to keep our best interests in stake (with the board of directors keeping a close check on them), then I think newspapers generally use the best judgment. What do you think?

Investigative Journalism at its Finest

My faith in fair, accurate, investigative has been restored somewhat, even on the eve of a national election. In one of my classes today, a Democrat friend was mockingly criticizing the GOP for searching out Obama's illegal immigrant aunt and his uncle, both living in poverty in Boston. Such is not the case, however.

The Times, a UK paper, spent six weeks searching for the lost family members. Their primary source? Obama's own book, Dreams from my Father. Through following passages in the book, public records, and interviews, the Times eventually found the family members, living in the United States, and published their results. Interestingly, the process used to find them is probably more interesting than that they were found.

Investigative journalism at its finest? You can't really accuse the Times of criticism, they like Obama.

Another Paper Drops the AP

Another paper has dropped the Associated Press as of today. The Columbus Dispatch has likely carried the AP for over 100 years, and due to the $800,000/year price tag, is parting ways with the company.

It seems to me that this trend is only going to continue. Could the AP possibly go out of business? I'm not sure what the AP could do to stay in business, because their core clients simply cannot afford the services anymore. Could the AP change their business model and attract more newspapers back? I think the AP will go out of business within the next five years or so, and another press syndicate will emerge with a fresh, innovative take on reporting that newspapers will be able to afford. These growing pains sure will hurt for a while.

Interview with Giff Nielsen, KHOU-Houston

My journalist is in town! Special thanks to Giff Nielsen, sports director and anchor for KHOU-11, the CBS affiliate in Houston, Texas for answering some of my questions. Enjoy:

Nielsen: I graduated from BYU with a BA in Communications with an emphasis in public relations. During my time in college, I had a chance to take other courses learning about the media along with PR so when the opportunity came to retire from professional football, I had some background in television that allowed me to have a small understanding of what I was getting myself into as the sports director at Channel 11 in Houston.

Daniel: How did you break into the field?

Nielsen: I was in the right place at the right time. Most young journalists have to work in smaller markets before they hit a top ten position but that was not the case with me. I learned how to learn in college and it paid off.

D: How do you define a good journalist?

N: It's up to a journalist to present the facts, be totally objective and let the viewers decide for themselves how they feel about what they've seen and heard. The exception is the sports department where you can have more fun reporting your information although there are some serious stories in today's sports world that need total objectivity.

D: How would you define the type of journalism you do?

N: Let me just say this. It's fun and everyone seems to want my job. Going to special sporting events and covering the local pro, college and high school teams is enjoyable for the most part although I've reported on some tragic stories.

D: How do you feel your journalism serves the community?

N: The sports scene in communities can be a diversion from the challenges of life. That in itself can help areas come together in a unique way. I've seen cities that have been down in the dumps for one reason or another rally behind their team to create a sense of excitement.

D: Have you ever had an experience in which you felt your work as a journalist really made a difference?

N: The news can be a great source of information to the public. That's really who we are. We just had an experience with Hurricane Ike and we were the eyes and ears of the public for many days. The Houston area counted on us to let them know what was going on and how they could get help. It was amazing to watch it and be a part of it.

Giff Nielsen was the starting quarterback for the BYU Cougars in the late 70's and was the starting QB for the Houston Oilers from 1982-1983. He lives in Sugar Land, TX with his family.

Chopper Crashes--A Sign of Something Bigger?

With the recent news chopper crash in Houston, my hometown, it raises the question of the safety and procedures of news choppers. We all love the police chase or the live aerial coverage of a fire or other type of explosion, but how safe are they? Do the proportion of news choppers that crash equal the number of other types of helicopters that crash?

Last year's crash was the result of two helicopters trying to cover the same story from the same position. The pilots were obviously a little too concerned with following the story than not hitting other choppers. This crash is still under investigation, but it definitely raises the question--how much are these employees under pressure to get the story over their own safety?

Maybe this says something even larger about our news organizations (if it turns out that there are proportionately more crashes in the news industry).

Newspaper Redesigns

In another bold move by a newspaper, the Hartford Courant is also redesigning its newspaper. Much has been made of the Chicago Tribune's change to the more colorful, USA Today-like feel, but the Courant's change may be even bolder. Here's the change:


In a bold move, the title has been moved to the vertical column on the left, with the new emphasis on the ".com" at the top, to direct people to the website. What a great idea. My local paper, the Houston Chronicle underwent a change around 2005 as well, but I was disappointed by the result:

Besides changing the font of the title, they made the paper considerably shorter and smaller, and each article was less substantial. They tried to make it seem like a great change, but many people were disappointed by the result. Changes are good, but don't sell out your readers.

News War

During our class viewing of "News War," I was delighted to see the typical reactions from those interviewed--excitement and acceptance of anyone as a journalist by those who worked in the online business, and disdain by those in print and television. (Especially enjoyable was seeing Dan Rather marginalize bloggers, the very people who exposed his careless reporting.) Today's class discussion was especially enlightening on the subject.

Especially interesting were the comments made on the current trend of making news entertaining, which Ted Koppel contends is the worst development in modern..., etc., etc. So, we can criticize society and bemoan its waywardness, or we can innovate and find a way to give the consumer what he or she wants, and make it intellectually stimulating at the same time. I for one thoroughly enjoy reading the New York Times every day, because of its smart, deep analysis. I also enjoy an occasional Daily Show--a light serving of news and journalist-mocking. In other words, there is a place for all kinds of news for all kinds of audiences. Sure, we are not watching the evening news (who does, really? I don't know anyone). We aren't subscribing to newspapers. But we are blogging, reading news online, and watching cable news.

There is no real issue to argue. Good or bad, the transition of the news is happening. Follow the audiences, and the media will thrive.

Why the "Death" of the Newspaper is Good

With the all but inevitable death of the newspaper as we know it, should we be alarmed? As journalists? As consumers? I offer a resounding "no."

There seems to always be a cry for the permanence of established media when a specific industry seems doomed for annihilation. When the audio tape was invented, and tape recorders became a household object, the radio industry feared that it was doomed. Why would people keep listening to the radio when they can record our music? The same dilemma was addressed with the television industry upon the advent of the VCR. All they have to do is record our shows and watch them later! They can even fast forward through the commercials!

The media industries that have survived and even flourished in the face of such threatening innovation are those that recognize, modify, and adapt their business model. True, newspapers will not survive for another ten, five, or even two years based on their current organization. But, the few will recognize how to change, and the rest will soon follow. iTunes, YouTube, online newspapers, Drudge Report, etc. all saw that technology opened a new opportunity, so they seized it, and they are surviving. The newspaper will change--it has to. We just shouldn't be so afraid of the unknown.

Using a PC is Cool Again--Microsoft's New Ad Campaign

Microsoft revealed late this evening that it would be launching a new $300 million advertising campaign in an attempt to reposition Windows and the PC. What is so surprising about this campaign, however, is that the theme of the campaign is a direct response to the Apple ads that everyone loves so much. That's right--"I'm a Mac." "And I'm a PC." The first advertisement will even include an actor dressed to look just like the PC from the Apple ads.

Such a bold move is very risky. The New York Times astutely recognizes the two possibilities--the public will recognize it as a swift and confident response to their attackers, or they could see it as giving credit to their bullies. I'm predicting that the ad campaign will be hugely successful. The campaign will be headed up by the same agency that rebranded Burger King with "Have it Your Way." If the two online ads are any sign of things to come (the ones featuring Bill Gates and Jerry Seinfeld), I think Microsoft is on their way to letting PC owners once again say with pride, "Yeah, I'm a PC."

Hacked Emails, Bloggers, and the Media

In a story that crosses bloggers, political figures, and invasion of privacy, it was discovered today that liberal hackers broke into Sarah Palin's email account, took screenshots, and distributed them to various websites like Gawker and Huffington Post. All sides of the spectrum would have to agree that such an attack is illegal, unethical, and quite dispicable. With many bloggers rummaging through Sarah Palin's closet looking for skeletons, we are treated everyday to a new accusation about fired commissioners, banned books, or unpaid FFA fees.

Besides the political aspect, what does this show about the access and ease with which sensitive and private material can be spread through the internet? Should websites like Huffington Post knowingly post a story with many of the screenshots? Could this be the result of unregulated "media" in an increasingly open world?

Of course, little can be done to stop such actions, but I think it is the responsiblity of media outlets with gatekeepers to filter such material, recognize it as illegal, and take the responsibile action, regardless of who the target is.

Who is a Journalist?

Journalism has evolved since its beginnings, but its rate of change has increased exponentially within the last few years. During my freshman year at BYU in 2003, I was one of the first people I knew to have a blog. I wrote my personal commentary about politics and the upcoming 2004 presidential election. At one point, I would have as many as thirty people a day, some of whom I knew, others I didn't, following what I said about the day's political news. In at least some small way, I was having an influence on others, and my opinions on politics actually mattered. How could that have been possible even ten years ago?

Today's media has changed to the point that organizations, businesses, and governments have changed the way that they release information to the public. They are now accountable to a much larger group of people, and no longer can a few phone calls keep a story from breaking. Bloggers near the inside of an important story have nothing to lose and don't belong to a company that tells them what to write about. We are our own bosses.

So who is a journalist? Really, anyone that knows how to use a computer, set up a blog, and communicate their ideas to the world. Of course, most of those on the internet don't really have anything noteworthy to say, but you don't have to work for a television station or a newspaper to break a story or to analyze a political story. When everyone has access, the public gets a purer story and more varied opinions. When eveyone is a journalist, the public wins.