How to Understand and Overcome the Key Differences Between Daily Life Language and Journalistic Language - Research Paper Example

 Title: How To Understand and Overcome The Key Differences Between Daily Life Language and Journalistic Language? Abstract: New Journalism that started in the 1960s may have opened up paths for the incorporation of daily life language in journalism. The process of sounding casual and easily relatable to listeners has had many accidents in the recent past, when idiosyncrasies of daily life language ruined the gravity of a journalistic approach and resulted in low grade reporting that was more commercial than actual journalism was meant to be. The study we undertake in this article concentrates on the use of modernism and different modes of language abstraction, and the impact it can have when mixed with high quality journalistic language. We try to create in-depth understanding of the need to empower every budding journalist with language modifications that will help him in defining his writing style and keep the quality and popularity at equal standing. Question: How different is daily life language and journalistic language from each other? Can daily life language be used in journalism? What is the best recipe to ensure that the combination of daily life vocabulary in journalistic language does not degrade the reading experience that a write-up offers? Introduction: A student of journalism will always try to investigate the root of the news he or she is pursuing. A story is not printable unless it is well researched, and appeals to the readers in the right manner. All through their first and second years of study, the students watch as different journalistic techniques are being taught to them. However, the scenario changes thoroughly when skills are needed to apply to work experience that begins by the close of the second year. The very first contradiction in theory and practice is the fact that the language used in theory is far more complicated and inapplicable for practical demos. In the present article we run a quick check on how different from each other are languages used in daily life and in journalistic routines. To keep the scope of study limited and ensure high quality, the language differences are studied in English and not in the rest of the leading world languages. Academic studies reveal that a great deal of expert thinking has gone into defining the quality and role of journalistic language in its functioning. Pioneers of the field have used specific notations and bookmarks to define how academic or journalistic language must differ in content from language used in daily life and our texts are evidences of the difference in complexity. However, when the same students who venture out to create practical applications basing on the theories that they learn, they find that none of the highly complex language is needed, except for a few scenarios. Yes, you need to prove your expertise in the presence of high-order officials and dignitaries, but that is all. Rest of the day, all through their activities and interviews, they need to go back to the use of daily life language. Except for the write-ups and publications and the chance meetings with select high order officials, the language needed in realizing journalistic goals in real life, totally depend upon the daily life language that is used to communicate, interview, and understand the cases of common people being studied. The greater the correlation between facts in daily life and the reports created is found, better is the impact of the report generated. And in order to achieve this, the reporter needs to use a combination of daily life and journalistic languages. However, when dealing with daily life language and using it to study societal issues, is the journey smooth for these reporters? Are all daily life facts as simple as they look? Is the vocabulary free from bigotry or double meaning? We assess al these aspects of the issues between daily life language and academic or journalistic language through our study in here. Review of Literature: To begin with, we must understand that not only is the shift from academic language to daily life language a straining task, it has aftermaths that lead to society following wrong trends, if ever a case of wrong usage appears. Liberalism in expression has never been as poorly defined as it is in present days. And what is more, much to the disgust of elders, the light-hearted reports and publications seem to get maximum coverage and popularity over the serious toned ones. In his book, “The Language of Journalism: Newspaper Culture”, Melvin J. Lasky correctly points out the challenges that this shift from academic to daily life language create. In his word, “Our newspaper culture lives in the tension between loyalties to liberal decencies and the necessities of truth-telling. ... races, in societies where enlightenment wrestles with bigotry; and about obscenities, in languages where liberal permissiveness strains to be absolute. ... I have been paying attention to some of the most highly charged cliches in our daily vocabulary, and have been suggesting that in.” (Lasky, 257). It is also noted that down memory lane, journalists had to take up a casual tone in reporting the events of war and strife from around the world during some of the major wars in America and Europe. This indeed was a great move and while the need to create a relationship with the reader was always upmost on the mind of reporters, war time reporting heightened the need to remove any distance between the reader and the reporter (Busa, 68). In ‘Reporting for Journalists’, Frost (2002) uses a direct study of how to make a good story come to life through a systematic approach in pursuing leads in the story, creating a book of contacts, running background research, and finally reporting the story across different media like television, radio, and newspapers (Frost, 12). A book that talks of all elements of journalism, his emphasis on the language aspect is not as much well defined as his use of language itself in the book is. In his book, English for Journalism, Wynford Hicks (2007) points out the elemental basics of using English in the field. However, he does not refrain from pointing out the problems and confusions that the clichés hidden in daily life language extend into journalistic use of the language. Therefore, a thorough reporting will be based on the use of language that not just appeals to the crowds and masses, but also steers clear of the conflicts in daily life and journalistic language offer (Hicks, 33). Douglas and Sutton (2003) have always maintained that social communications have a great deal of insights to offer in the field of daily life language. It is well known today that language abstraction is an art that often defines the impression a person creates on his listener. Fiedler suggests that the need to create an understanding of social communications is crucial in deciding how general mentalities in society can be manipulated by using the different strategies in it. As always, language used in writing always ultimately decides the thinking or mentality of the readers. So ideally, creating a good recipe is important for every journalist. Discussion: It is indeed true that in today’s world, the major shift in journalistic language is directly visible in the newspaper and mass media culture (Lasky, 256). However the onset of the dotcom revolution has brought in a further decline in quality of languages, both academic and daily life. As it is, American mass media is a place of constant innovation and discoveries. However, the need to keep up with the changing society propels reporters to use vocabulary and sentences that appeal to the readers best. In most cases such an innovative approach is bound to give us high and low quality results. However, this is not so in the case of journalism as the only focus has been on creating stories that entertain and inform, and therefore, the language with its finesses has only gotten degraded over time. Stories that give readers a pleasant experience are definitely more in demand, and the more fictional the facts are made to sound the better is their performance. The American Civil War indeed saw a change in reporting styles and languages used (Busa, 68). As a result, the write-ups and stories became more and more lucid and easy to understand, taking away a great chunk of complicated vocabulary from the face of journalism. Also, the use of narratives became the best remedy to war time reporting. Since then the art has slowly shifted to travel and political journalism. All through his book, Frost comes across as the ideal modern day journalist whose language is swift, modern, and crisp. The book, as is well accepted, conducts a conditioning of the mind wherein the reader ends up using the language that the writer has used, which in itself is a highlight example of sober modern day journalistic language that does not embrace or endorse the idiosyncrasies of daily life language, and is suitable for internet run media outlets as well. Media skills are important, but maintaining high quality is important too. The best cliché in daily life language that journalists fail to master and employ in their reports is the art of language abstraction, a factor that is an unconscious element of our daily life and communication. As a result, even when they are close to creating a narrative that sounds stupendously naturally written, they fail to create the necessary impact since abstractions cannot be applied in journalistic reporting (Douglas & Sutton, 19). Further on, the use of different language abstractions can have totally different impacts in understanding, and if journalists can use these different approaches, then they can create a unique flavor in their write-ups every single time. However, one must remember, that the use of bias in social communication (Fiedler, 101) is a factor that is best left away from journalism. It is indeed noticeable that biased reporting can take away a great deal of focus from the hard work behind creating a story, and make the reporter sound like a silent campaigner on the loose. Therefore, the need to use high quality journalistic language is definitely not totally done with. Given the popularity of online print media, there is no doubt that the use of daily life language in journalism is bound to lead to more popularity of reports. However, the geniality of social communications and the arts of language abstraction needs to be carefully incorporated in the report to be able to create a write-up that is highly successful in reducing the gap between the observer and the observed. In cases, where the reporter is unable to experiment with such idiosyncrasies of modern daily life language and only end up in degrading the quality of the journalistic language that he has been trained in, he should stick to the use of academic and journalistic language and not bother about the popularity of the report. Going by set standards and practices always has its fair share of rewards, even if that does not include popularity or mass media success. High quality language will still be able to attract the serious thinkers, critics, and other journalists who are looking for authentic stories and research in the topic the reporter chooses to write. When a student ventures to create a practical application of all that he has studied through the first and second years of journalism, he faces this daunting task of creating the perfect balance in language used during the generation of a story and in creating the final report. A successful journalist is one who is capable of avoiding daily life language from entering into his style of journalistic reporting and the language used there in. Conclusion: There are definite differences between daily life language and academic or journalistic language and when a reporter has to create a modern day report for any of the mass media portals he wishes to get flashed on, he has to ensure that the right degree of modernism, high quality journalistic language, and language abstraction can create a write-up that will receive high popular appeal and critical appreciation. References: Busa, M.G. (2013). Introducing the Language of the News: A Student’s Guide, London: Routledge. Douglas, K.M. & Sutton, R.M. (2011). By their words ye shall know them: Language abstraction and the likeability of describers, University of Kent, UK, retrieved on May 19th, 2014, from: http://kar.kent.ac.uk/23897/1/Douglas%20%26%20Sutton%20EJSP%202010.pdf Frost, C. (2002). Reporting for Journalists, London: Routledge. Fiedler, K. (2011). Social Communication, Sussex: Psychology Press. Hicks, W. (2007). English for Journalists, Edn. 3, London: Routledge. Lasky, M.J. (2002). The Language of Journalism: Newspaper Culture. Volume one. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers. Read More