Cyber Journalism - Case Study Example

You Can’t Be Neutral on a Moving…Screen We have lived with the myth of neutrality and professional journalism for so long that we believe it, and proclaim it, when we know that it is not only untrue—but it isn’t even what we want. The public has wanted the media to present us with bare facts for decades (Ward) and now cyberjournalists do just that. Cyberjournalists are merely citizen journalists who are continuing a long tradition of publishing what matters to them and their readership. The only difference today is that the cyberjournalist answers directly to their audience, rather than to a publisher who traditionally held journalists responsible for reporting ethically. Yet, there is no consensus among publishers as to what is ethical. In the end, ethics are the responsibility of the cyberjournalist and the audience. You Can’t Be Neutral on a Moving…Screen The original phrase, from a book by Howard Zinn, was “You Can’t Be Neutral on a Moving Train.” Cyberjournalism is like a high-speed rail that moves so fast and is so personal that it isn’t possible to be neutral. The bigger question is whether we should even try, in spite of the fact that western society often assumes that all journalists are bound to neutrality when, nearly a century ago, Henry Luce, founder of Time magazine insisted that very concept objectivity was foolish (Ward, 2006). He contended that the public needed the media to explain and interpret the impact of events on their lives. Yet, we insist that it is true and to be expected of the press, regardless of medium. With the speed of cyberspace, it is difficult, if not impossible to be neutral. By the time the 1960’s arrived, Americans had become distrustful of such clarifications on their behalf adding a twist to Luce’s view: that no one can be objective. They public wanted to see the bare facts and decide for themselves what they meant (Ward). Youth no longer trusted the media with full-disclosure, even in supposedly free countries. When Chicagoan Justin Hall began blogging in 2004, many of the new blogging generation embraced the concept of taking news into their own hands –after all, they were the children and grandchildren of the children of the 1960’s generation. America was ready. Evolution–Or More of the Same? Beyond the big cities that claim the largest share of the journalism world, the rest of the United States already knew what citizen journalism was long before cyberjournalism. For more than a century and a half—long before Time magazine hit the newsstands—local citizens had been writing columns about who had dinner at whose house last Sunday night, or which church was gearing up for the next ice cream social. That was citizen journalism. Even back then, reporters often wrote under a pseudonym like “Gomper’s Corner’s Gertie,” a precursor to the userids of bloggers like Duncan Bowen Black who blogs at Atrios on at Eschatonblog.com. Like any citizen journalist, Atrios is a citizen of the world he writes about: economics. Over the years, we have come to assume that reporters are somehow sanctioned by having earned a degree from a school of journalism. Neither “Gomper’s Corner’s Gertie” nor Atrios have a degree in journalism. But, then, neither does Brian Williams, anchor and managing editor of NBC Nightly News. He has numerous journalism awards under his belt, yet he never completed college. Yet, during the past two decades he has had job titles like “reporter,” “correspondent” and “anchor.” Through books and film, we have learned how news arrives on our doorstep. “There are two ways information becomes news. Either an editor assigns someone to write about it, or a reporter brings the story to the editor’s attention, hoping the story will be granted coveted print space. Otherwise, the story dies.” (Stanton, 2007, p. 25-26) Then a so-called journalist (or reporter) like Brian Williams, who does not have a degree in journalism, brings us that news. With cyberjournalism, the hierarchy has faded away. Anyone can print—or post—anything any time they want and they don’t need an editor granting them permission—even Brian Williams could blog on his own, separate from his employer. Readers flock to the cyberjournalists who reflect their interests, their values, or even just their hobbies, in a way no publisher of a generic geographical paying market ever could. Few people who move from Peoria, Illinois, to Brisbane, Australia, are likely to pay for a mail subscription to their hometown newspaper that is catering to the local residents. Along the way, the public has discovered what the bloggers know and journalism schools fear will become public knowledge: anyone can be a journalist as long as they offer what the public finds interesting. News, especially on the internet, is selected primarily based on its timeliness but also on its impact on the reader. (Praeger, 2007) Cyberjournalists can take advantage of the ability to announce breaking news, even while the coverage is being written about and photographed, in a way that last night’s live newscast and this morning printed paper, simply cannot. The news comes fast and furious, but the reader has a plethora of news sources to choose from other than, or in addition to, the hometown news. The cyberjournalist may be missing a few perks of the traditional journalist. A blogger probably does not have a paginator handy to proofread their content and make it look pretty. In addition, the cyberjournalist, whether they are reporting for CNN or blogging from Buloxi, the speed of publishing can, all too easily, lead to the publication of errors. But, the media has forever been guilty of errors ranging from the Chicago Tribune’s guffaw, “Dewey Defeats Truman,” headline in 1948 to the ongoing misinformation and disinformation such as a mid-air explosion of an aircraft in the late 1990’s that was allegedly attacked by terrorists. Hundreds of eye-witnesses insisted they saw a bomb--even though there wasn’t one. (Rosenberg and Feldman, p. 176). Nevertheless, the story did not die for months. As long as cyberjournalists want to blog there is nothing stopping them because the hierarchy is skewed, if not entirely dismantled. And, as long as there are mistaken eye-witnesses, no journalist and no blogger can guarantee that facts are facts. Cyberjournalists need no one’s permission and they can recklessly blog now and fact check later. The screen is moving too fast to worry about being neutral. In another hour, this minute’s post will be crawling down the page as it is replaced by newer and newer news. On the flip side, proofing tools are not the private domain of the traditional journalist. Anyone can verify an adage by visiting Bartleby.com—and possibly coming away with a new awareness that another journalist might miss. For instance, “great minds think alike,” is a well-known saying—but it is only half of the quote. The rest is, “and great minds never differ.” No one wants to get the news wrong. Unlike traditional journalists who carefully guide their sources, cyberjournalists encourage readers to verify facts. The Drudge Report even provides a link the Drudge Reference Desk (refdesk.com) where readers are encouraged to check references used in stories all across the internet. Getting Social The news media has always been about getting social. Along with engagements, wedding announcements and obituaries, they have tossed in news of wars, famine, and economics. Berkowitz (1997) put forth nearly a decade before the first blog that the idea that the media is about anything other than social interaction between living things is preposterous. In the strictest since, a newspaper is not a business since, unlike all other businesses, the newspaper enjoys protection by the First Amendment, implying that the newspaper can print anything and call it freedom of speech. In addition, newspapers that are members of the American Newspaper Guild are subject to severance pay clauses and are restricted to inappropriate behavior such as substance abuse or sexual forays while on the job. Unwittingly, Berkowitz (1997) brought up the sticky-wicket of defining a journalist. Journalists in America have always pleaded their First Amendment rights. But is a blogger covered by the rights of a journalist? First, we it would help considerably if we could define what a journalist is. But, it is unlikely that will happen. Meanwhile, a definition doesn’t seem to matter to the cyberjournalists. The screen is moving too fast. By the time anyone cares who wrote something, it has been replaced with another late-breaking story—or the most recent cat photo of the day. Without an editor, anything goes. Defining a journalist’s ethics and accountability is, therefore, even more complicated. One of the protections traditional journalists enjoy is provided by an editor who does take on the mantle of determining what is appropriate to publish. An editor may have a policy of not covering suicides unless someone else is harmed during the suicide, such as someone intentionally driving off a cliff and killing not only themselves but a passenger. The editor’s biggest stick was to fire a journalist, or to at least restrict what they were allowed to write. There is no equivalent since the vast number of cyberjournalists generate their own revenue, either through their website or through some other revenue stream. A cyberjournalist who does not answer to an editor may not differentiate between when to publish, and when to offer a family privacy to grieve. There appear to be few holds barred when it comes to cyberjournalism, and perhaps no protection aside from holding one’s self accountable to the public. Hurst and Patching (2005) suggest that the question of ethics is an “endless conversation” in a culture where unethical behavior should simple be unheard of. The implication is that all journalists—including cyberjournalists—need to monitor their own words. In other words, all journalists should just play nice. With all the talk about social networks online, journalists do need to remain aware that they are socializing—they are interacting with other people who read what they write and watch what they film and photograph. But, there are so many choices that the ultimate responsibility is up to the viewer. We have known for years that certain publications exercise bias, with pride. The Drudge Report does select stories from across the internet but the founder, Matt Drudge, proudly claims to be a conservative. There are publications that even boast the name, such as the magazine “The American Conservative.” And, of course, we would be disappointed if Mother Earth News began publishing with anything other than a liberal slant. Discussion Neutrality is not only impossible, it is irrelevant and in low demand. Today’s public wants raw information, as quickly as possible. Today’s audience knows that their facts are biased –and they flock to the providers with whom they share that bias, when they want their facts translated for them. The media has not really changed much, other than the newspaper of yesterday is now a computer screen and, instead of publishing daily or week, the news arrives by the minute. If there was an error in last’s hour’s post, it has been corrected and the misinformation is gone—aside from being spidered by several dozen search engines and quoted by hundreds of other websites. Of course, an hour from now, there will be another dozen news stories on the screen and everyone will have forgotten about this hour’s top stories. Perhaps the ethics of what is being published is up to the audience, rather than the cyberjournalist. The audience changes even faster than the news and with each logon there is a fresh set of eyes with their own set of ethics and values. While they may not want to know how their neighbor’s daughter killed herself, they can’t help but reading about it when a cyberjournalist publishes the details. “Life is short,” we tell ourselves. It goes by so quickly. There just is no time to be neutral and with high-speed internet the news comes at us even faster. We’re too busy hitting the refresh button to be neutral. References Ward, Stephen J. A., (2006). Invention of journalism ethics. Montreal, CA: McGill-Queens University Press. Stanton, Richard C. (2007). All news Is local: The failure of the media to reflect world events in a globalization age. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, Inc. English proverbs. Retrieved 7/28/2011 from the Wikiquote Wiki: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/English_proverbs#G Berkowitz, Dan (1997). Social meanings of news. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Willis, Jim (2007). The media effect: How the news influences politics and government. Westport, CT: Praeger Press. Rosenberg, Howard & Feldman, Charles S. (2008). No time to think: The menace of media speed and the 24-hour news cycle. New York, NY: Continuum Press. Brian Williams biography. Retrieved July 28, 2011, from MSNBC website http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3667173/ns/nightly_news-about_us/t/brian-williams/ Hirst, Martin & Patching, Roger (2005). Journalism ethics: Arguments and cases. Australia: Oxford University Press. Read More