What is the role of a journalist? It's a rapidly-changing world these days - every word is up for grabs for re-definition. Journalism is a blurry field right now. Just where are the distinctions between formal news, alternative news, and amateur blogs? People have long been upset that the formal news services are owned by big-business interests and tend to lean a bit partisan, but I think we have a bigger problem today. This blurring of the lines has led to a confused and misinformed population, which I think is a very dangerous thing.
I'll take two examples from current events. First, the big one everyone knows about - Ebola. This was a crisis in Africa, then we got a few cases here in the USA and media coverage exploded (this act in itself is a bit shameful, but that's another topic). Sadly, despite the very clear and repeated coverage from the formal news services that Ebola is NOT a very transmissible virus, and despite the fact that we've known about this virus for almost 40 years, alternative news sites and independent bloggers are continuing to spread confusion and panic. The sign that they're having an impact is that even pretty respectable people believe that the formal news services and the government are withholding key points of information to intentionally deceive us. This is so absurd it doesn't even warrant continuing.
The second case is a smaller one, and it concerns a recent news story that the mayor of nearby Houston was forcing a group of pastors to turn over their sermons for inspection. This was so rapidly pulled out of context that even my own church sowed some fear yesterday that we're nearing the point when the government will be snooping on what we say in church. The truth is so far from that - in fact the lawsuit began when Christians sued the government related to the government's claim that churches had misled citizens in signing petitions. The city has clearly stated that they never had any intention of scrutinizing the church's sermons, but merely wanted any information related to how they promoted the petitions.
Alternative news services are a dangerous curator of content in a social society, where people rapidly and easily share media among each other. Although it's often recognized that this rapid sharing also comes with a benefit - a very short memory - it's still dangerous to see journalism that is so sharply and intentionally one-sided spread so widely. It seems that the formal news media, who once upon a time attempted to be nonpartisan, have been forced to share the stage with overtly partisan services. And it's then further compounded by independent bloggers expressing their unfounded and uninformed opinions (the fact that this would include me is an irony not entirely lost on me). Sadly even the formal news services, bowing to this pressing competition, often prefer to exert a competitive advantage through rapid-fire soundbites and quick-response breaking news, which can reduce them to poorly-researched articles, mistakes arising from speculation, and more.
Where is all the quality journalism? Where are the writers who are producing long-form articles that attempt, in an unbiased way, to analyze issues and events and present a more thorough understanding of them? Why are we, as Western news consumers, so short on attention span that we can't process journalism like that? Back to my question - what is the role of a journalist? I believe that their role today is to strike a balance between presenting the breaking news and disseminating understanding to the population at large. They must be able to clarify things and communicate them concisely and accurately. Specialization will be needed so that journalists can actually understand the issues they are reporting on. The industry needs a new code of ethics. The citizens of a developed and educated nation deserve better.
