Radical Approaches in Journalism - Research Paper Example

Radical Approaches in Journalism Introduction Journalism refers to an activity where journalists engage in preparation of written, audio or visual material intended for distribution via the public media. This is with reference to ongoing, factual proceedings of civic concern. The materials disseminated to the public is meant to inform the society at large, more about the happenings in it and to make public, issues that would have been private. In the contemporary society, this is the methodology implemented to distribute information to the public. There are various forms of journalism depending on the workings of respective governments and intended audiences. These forms include: Broadcast journalism- this is the speaking or writing intended to be disseminated through the television or radio broadcasting. Advocacy Journalism- this refers to the process of writing in order to advocate specific viewpoints or have influence of the views of the audience. Gonzo journalism- it is an individualistic form of journalism which was initiated by Hunter Thompson. Drone journalism- this refers to a journalistic process where drones are employed so as to capture effective footage of the information to be gathered. Yellow journalism- it is also referred to as sensationalism which entails writing to emphasise rumours or claims that have been exaggerated. Investigative journalism- this is a journalistic process which entails writing so as to explain more about people or events for the purpose of giving a clear description of a certain topic. Tabloid journalism- this refers to a journalistic process which employs opinionated claims in the process of writing. This essay will cover journalism in the western democracies and how the works of two philosophers have influenced the journalism process in these western parts. The two philosophers to be covered in this case are: Slavoj Zizek and Jean Baudrillard. Slavoj Zizek was born in the year 1949 and is known to be a Slovene Philosopher as well as a cultural critic. He writes on a varied range of topics which include: culture studies, psychoanalysis, political theory, theology an film theory. Zizek is an individual who aims at provoking the society to think anew about many issues that happen around. His work in the eyes of many, is seen to represent one of the two current notion of a progressive substitute- that of socialism rather than organisational imagination. There are two major themes of evaluation of ideas from Zizek which are lack of firmness in argumentation and failure to point out an effective alternative in his condemnation of current economic, social and political arrangements. His political and philosophical positions have always been known not to be clear because of his lack of proper argumentation. He critiques have also made him known as a failure since he lacks consistency in his work. He has claimed to offer support to the revolutionary project by Marxist but one thing that has made the project unclear is his lack of vision. Zizek’s work is generally known to lack facts of history which makes his work be more provoking rather than insighting. In this case he is generally known to bring on confusion because he contradicts what is produced by other individuals. Information disseminated to the public through various ways is contradicted by his own findings because he lacks historical facts and has poor argumentation. This gives a clear impression that individuals who go through his findings are usually confused since they do not know whether to believe Zizek or other sources of information. It makes it difficult for people to understand the happenings around them due to contradiction that occurs between the sources of information. In the western democracies, Zizek has played a role in undermining the importance of journalism because of his undertakings. Journalism is meant to brief people on all that happens so as to keep them posted but is has been difficult for them to understand because of Zizek’s contradictions. Jean Baudrillard is another philosopher who has influenced individuals’ understanding of the role of journalism in the western democracies. He was born in the year 1929 and passed in the year 2007. He was a sociologist, a cultural theorist and a philosopher, his work in the contemporary society is associated with post-structuralism and postmodernism. He was best known for his analyses of technological and mediation communication. He was also involved in writing though majorly concentrated on technological advancements. In his writing work, he touched on gender relations, journalistic commentaries about cloning, the Gulf war, Rushdie affair, consumerism, communal understanding of history and New York World Trade Centre attacks and AIDS. In his work on object value system, he pointed out four major ways of obtaining the value of the object. The four ways he pointed out are: 1. The functional worth of the object. This refers to the instrumental use of the object in question and he goes ahead to give an example of a refrigerator where he says that its instrumental purpose is to cool. 2. The second value-making process if the exchange worth of the object. Here he talks about the economic value of the object and gives an example as follows. one refrigerator may have a value equal to salary received in three working months. 3. Symbolic worth of the object is the third process of determination. This refers to worth assigned to an object by a subject, in relation to a different subject. He gives an example of a pen where he says that a pen may be a symbol of a gift given to a student in regards to graduation. 4. The last determination process is the sign worth of the object. In this last determination process he talks of the value found in an organisation of objects. He gives an example of a diamond ring which he points out that it may have no function but may show specific social values such as class or taste. These are the processes he pointed out and it is clear that in his work he criticised other individuals’ findings. In the field of journalism, he criticised information produced by journalists making it difficult for individuals to believe and have trust in what was being published by the social media. In this field he specifically majored on AID, war in World Trade centre in the New York and other sensible issues that affected various regions. This therefore gives a clear impression that he played a role in influencing peoples’ understandings on the role of journalism because he criticised their findings making people to lose their trust in information received through social media. In details, this essay will touch on how the works of the two philosophers undermine the conventional understandings of the role played by journalism and to what extent this has been influenced. Just as other regions, the role of journalism in the western democracies is to disseminate information to the public. The information in this case refers to daily happenings around the people regarding the economy of the country. The fact that journalism is a process intended to keep individuals on daily happenings gives a clear impression that this is the methodology which is trusted by many as it is a process known to produce facts about happenings. This is the reason why it is used by government bodies to help the citizens have information about all that continues within the nation and all changes being made within the authority, the rules and regulations governing a nation so as to guide the citizens on how to abide by the law. The works of these two philosophers have had impact on undermining the role of journalism in the western democracies to some extent. Jean was known to be one of the critical thinkers of his time. He was known to be influential as his notions had bearing on various fields including technology, art and politics. He sophisticated hypothetical analyses far better than simplistic misrepresentation. Employing key concepts such as simulation, symbolic exchange ad provoking-though analyses is what he implemented in his work. His features are the ones that made him look different from other researchers since his reports were not insighting. (Clarke, 2010, 123). The Gulf war did not take is another book that was written by Baudrillard. The title itself gives the reason why his work contributes to undermining the understanding of the role of journalism in the western democracies. This is a war known to have taken place and this news was disseminated through social media. This shows that he criticized what was provided by the social media undermining the understanding of its role in the society (Baudrillard, 1995, 68). Baudrillard was not at par with information disseminated through the social media especially through the television as he gave some reasons as to why he never supported social media. Some of the reasons are: It gives a reflection of a fundamental reality It masks and distorts a basic realism It masks the absence of a indispensable reality It bears no relation to any reality whatever: it is its own pure simulacrum Lane points out that Jean was known to be a controversial philosopher and he was very famous. He lists some of the topics that Jean concentrated on in including technology, America and postmodernism and primitivism (Lane, 2013, 152). There are various challenges that are facing the contemporary society and especially the field of journalism. A challenge such as what took place in the time of Jean is one among these challenges and this is why the journalists work hard to make certain that they disseminate true information to avoid inconveniences (Allan, 2005, 320). Jean was known to believe in himself and he had faith in what he did. That is the reason why he undertook his research activities later on publishing information sure that he knew what he was up to. He was convinced that his research was the best and this made him have the spirit of undertaking a research after another (Reckwitz, 2002, 252). Jean referred to sociology as a critical issue and had to be handled with care so as to make sure that the citizens receive correct information rather than rumours or information on occasions that never took place (Boltanski and Thevenot, 1999, 364). This is why he came up with the information that The Gulf War never took place which criticised what the social media does because they had disseminated dissimilar information. Honneth points out that Jean thought of something that very few people would have thought of. This is because without the support of other individuals, he was able to carry out various researches as he had realised that the social media does not at times disseminate the correct information (Honneth, 2004, 472). Jean is also seen to be courageous because he is able to go ahead and confront the media by giving them a challenge. With this type of character, he contributes to undermining the understanding of role of journalism in the society. This is specifically because of his character where he makes people that citizens are able to carry out research and gather important information more than journalists who are the ones depended on for updates. This builds up a bad reputation for the journalism body at large because for them they work as a team but an individual is in a position to challenge them. (Elam and Bertilsson, 2003, 248). Most of the information distributed to the public through the social media appeared to be myths in the eyes of Jean. That is why even in his research undertakings he implemented his own methodologies in order to prove that he was different and that his criticisms were not out of envy or hatred. He aimed at showing his fellow colleagues that he was in a position to make it different in the society and it is his findings that he referred to as real work as he had done it on his own. He referred to the journalists’ findings as myth since he was not around when the research was being done and was not sure whether the information being distributed was true. (Chenilo, 2006, 17). He always made sure that he justified his findings to avoid shame and prove that he was able to do something. After justifying his work is when he went ahead to disseminate information because he knew he was undertaking a responsibility that was not his and if he distributed wrong information with any intention he would be in problems with the authority. (Wagner, 1999, 345). Slavoj on the other hand, has also had impact on undermining understanding the role of journalism in the society. In his work , he generally wills to venture into the study of culture especially movies. Here he talks of the media representations in “Post-modern liberal capitalist”. He has used various methodologies to put across what he intends to. He has used various approaches where he has used the internet to by posting videos and texts there (Patelis, 2000, 52). He wants to find a way to move away from a route from what he says is dysfunctional majorly the global-capitalist system. Dean points out that Slavoj has the concern of the citizens at heart. In this case, in his undertakings it is different because he does not choose to criticise the journalism body. With him he only aims at expounding on information that has already been gathered but the problem with his methodology is that he lacks facts of history. This makes his work so pale and the fact that he insists he plays an important role of dissemination of information, he brings about confusion as his work is provoking and not insighting as it is expected to be. Here he does not display the right image of a journalist because journalists do not undertake their job as he does. (Dean, 1997, 258). When he decides to explain on some features or information gathered about something, he does not do it to completion and those who follow up on his findings end up being outdates as they are not in a position to master all the proceedings around them. This means that important information may be disseminated without the knowledge of those who are usually caught up somewhere with many activities later on perusing his work which is incomplete. This is the feature that makes his work annoying to the eye of other citizens (Rogers, 2002, 15). With his psychoanalytic work, he links his thoughts with the current situation in the society. In this case, he talks about psychoanalytic methodologies that can be implemented in order to make the treatment situation better. This clearly shows that he speaks about issues that have not been implemented meaning he is giving out an idea. Here he lacks historical fats simply because he does not discuss issues that are being exercised (Ebert, 1996, 53). He speaks out his mind giving opinions to what methods can be used in order to make the situation of a nation better yet he does not take part in the implementation himself. It is therefore clear that he does not so much concentrate on what happens around rather speaking out what he thinks is the best (Parker, 2003, 75). Slavoj does not so much concentrate on the issues that take place with the implementations that are in place at that particular time. In the event of a problem, he explains on the implementations that can be used to solve that problem without taking into consideration other facts like expenses and the consequences of what he is suggesting. This is what makes his work annoying since he does not take time to clearly explain things (Nicol, 2000, 12). McLaren points out that Slavoj views the normal work of journalism as naked politics. This is because the journalists only aim at distributing information without thinking of ways that can be used to find solutions to problems that take place in day to day activities. This is why Slavoj in is writing work points out on a problem and suggests a possible solution for it. The problem lies where he suggests the solution but does not clearly explain why, how and when the solution can be implemented. This is where the confusion comes in (McLaren, 2002, 628). Slavoj gives a critical introduction of information distribution but on reaching some point he loses track making his information not reliable. This is the reason as to why he is referred to as a philosopher who lacks facts and has poor argumentative techniques (Kay, 2003, 48). Slavoj does not give straight explanations on his findings because he has poor argumentative techniques which make his work poor universality in dissemination of information (Butler, 2000, 81). Myres generally points out on the character of Slavoj as a individual giving all the reasons as to why he is regarded a success and his weaknesses in general. This book is essential in equipping students with information on the type of person Slavoj is ( Myres, 2003, 72). Conclusion Slavoj and Jean have influenced journalism by undermining the understanding of the role of journalism. This is because of their arguments that are against the use of social media to pass on information to the public. This gives a clear impression that they are against the technological features that have been implemented in the modern society. Slavoj in his case argues out that information passed on through the social media is contradicting to what takes place in the society. He goes ahead to state that the facts that are provided through the social media cannot b relied on as it is not real. This is why he goes ahead to proving information that contradicts with that of the media. In this case, he has led to the misunderstanding on the use of journalism because he publishes information that has no historical facts. This brings about confusion because individuals do not understand the contradicting information from the social media and Slavoj. He provides information that cannot be relied on because he lacks reliable argumentation to support his reports. Lack of evidence and sensible argumentation does not clearly bring out information that could have been published. This means that his findings are confusing as they are contradicting and they do not have evidence to support it. For those who go through his findings do not clearly understand daily happenings because the information provided is not clear enough. The main thing is that his findings instead of bringing on insight to those who read them, they become provoking instead. This is a feature which has brought about confusion because people depend on journalists to provide every detail on daily happenings but with this kind of character, people lose interest in journalism since they do not get to understand what function it has to the society. Jean was a philosopher who never supported the use of social media to disseminate information. In his findings, he always proved the media wrong by providing information on events where his findings contradicted with those of the social media. This created confusion because people did not know whom to believe. He criticised whatever was aired or published by journalists claiming that other stories published but journalists were made up and that those events never took place. This gives a clear impression that he contributed to lose of trust to the social media by the citizens. In this case, the role of journalism is not clearly understood because if it happens that there are researchers who come up with findings dissimilar to what is disseminated by the journalists, the journalists do not do their work effectively. The main function of journalism is to disseminate information to the public but if there are occasions where the media disseminates wrong information yet other researchers gathers correct information it becomes a problem. This is what Jean aimed at. He did his research to make certain that he outdoes the journalists and this created curiosity among the people who received such information Recommendation In the contemporary society, it is necessary that the journalism body makes sure that it does enough research and makes sure that the findings are correct before disseminating any information. This is because the social media is the only body expected to provide correct information of al proceedings to citizens of various countries. This is the methodology that is applied in the current society in many nations. In this case, the journalism body should take up the responsibility to make sure that every rumour around is investigated thoroughly to avoid any confusion and curiosity among people. The journalism body should be able to prove that it is the best body to rely on for information and work extra hard to prove it to the people. Citizens on the other hand should not learn to rely on rumours. This is because in the contemporary society, there are many criminal cases reported as a result of rumours. This is the reason why it is important to follow proceedings around us through what is received from the social media. This means that every citizen should take up responsibility and wait for full review of proceedings to be released from the social media rather than relying on rumours, an issue which can cause fatal damage to the society at large. With the help of the government, journalists are able to undertake their research effectively and at the end publish correct information. This means that the government of any given nation should be responsible to make sure that all research undertakings taken by journalists are successful and effective. The governments can ensure this by making sure that all the facilities required for these processes are available. Machinery and any other facility that is required by journalists to undertake effective research should be provided by the governments. The government should also make sure that all the facilities required are made available and at the right amount. A nation is a large area where of research is to be conducted, there should be sufficient personnel to do so. In this case, it is the responsibility of the government to make sure that the number of journalists is reasonable. This is because research has to be undertaken in various parts of the nation meaning there should be many journalists to gather information from every region. This is why the number should be high it also helps to avoid delay of dissemination of information to the public. The journalists should also be committed to their work to make sure that they undertake effective research to avoid inconveniences in dissemination of information. Joint efforts in the crew ensure effective and fast research process which makes it possible for journalists to make certain that by the end of the day they will have carried undertaken what was planned to completion. In general, for effective dissemination of information to the public, it requires responsible citizens, government officials and sufficient personnel to carry out the research. Bibliography Allan, S. (2005). Journalism: Critical Issues. Location: McGraw-Hill International. Baudrillard, J., 1995. The Gulf War did not take place. Indiana University Press. Boltanski, L and Thevenot, L., (1999). The sociology of Critical Capacity. European Journal of Social Theory. 10 (2), 359-377. Butler, J, Laclau, E & Žižek, S (2000) Contingency, hegemony, universality: Contemporary dialogues on the Left. London: Verso. Chernilo, D., (2006). Social Theory’s Methodoloical Nationalism: Myth and Reality. European Journal of Social Theory. 10 (9), 5-22. Clarke, D. B et.al., 2010. Jean Baudrillard: Fatal Theories. London: Routledge. Dean, J. (1997), “Virtually Citizens,” Constellations 4(2), 251-264. Ebert, T (1996) Ludic feminism and after: Postmodernism, desire, and labour in late capitalism. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press. Elam, M and Bertilsson, M., (2003). Consuming, Engaging and Confronting Science: The Emerging Dimensions of Scientific Citizenship. European Journal of Social Theory. 10 (6), 233 251. Honneth, A., (2004). Organised Self-Realisation: Some Paradoxes of Individualisation. European Journal of Social Theory. 10 (7), 463-478. Kay, S (2003) Žižek: A critical introduction. Cambridge: Polity Press. Lane, J. R., 2013. Jean Baudrillard. London: Routledge. McLaren, P (2002) Slavoj Žižek’s naked politics: Opting for the impossible, a secondary elaboration. Journal of Advanced Composition Quarterly. 21(3), 614-637. Myers, T (2003) Slavoj Žižek. London: Routledge. Nicol, B (2000) Normality and other kinds of madness: Žižek and the traumatic core of the subject. Psychoanalytic Studies, 2(1), 7-19. Parker, I (2003) Lacanian social theory and clinical practice. Psychoanalysis and Contemporary Thought. 26(2), 51-77. Patelis, K. (2000), “E-Mediation by America Online,” Preferred Placement: Knowledge Politics on the Web, Maastrict: Jan van Eyck Academie. 49–64. Reckwitz, A., (2002). Towards a Theory of Social Practices: A Development in Cultural Theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory. 10 (5), 243-263. Rogers, R. (2002), “The Issue has Left the Building,” paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Association of Internet Researchers, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 13– 16. Wagner, P., (1999). After Justification: Repertoires of Evaluation and the Sociology of Modernity. European Journal of Social Theory. 10 (2), 341-357. Read More