Is Journalism In Decline?

[Sukerkin]

It's a broad brush question I know and one that will vary somewhat depending on which country you are from. But I definitely feel that there is less fact-checking and application of simple common sense to reporting than there used to be - especially in the digital media.

A case in point is this simple article from the BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-23394233

We cannot expect journalists to be experts in all fields, for we ourselves are not after all but maybe they should be smart enough to ask someone who is an expert before publishing something. There are two phrases in this article which when taken together show that the writer hadn't got his brain in gear: "dropped inert bombs" and "None of the devices exploded".

In fact, I suspect that this story was lifted from elsewhere and edited a bit to avoid any publishing issues. The same story from another source carries more detail which negates the apparently redundant phrase in the BBC article:

"The U.S. 7th Fleet said in a statement on Saturday that the two AV-8B Harrier jets launched from an aircraft carrier each jettisoned an inert bomb and an unarmed explosive bomb in the World Heritage-listed marine park off Queensland state on Tuesday."

Even so, it is evidence of insufficient rigour being applied to story writing from one of the premier news sources on the planet.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Is Journalism In Decline?

Yes and it has been for years.

I had to do a paper for a class in college, oddly enough it was a class on terrorism and the paper crossed over, by accident, into the media. These days Journalism is much more concerned with the profits of their sponsors than they are with reporting the news. This is why there is so much "BIG" news mixed with sensationalism these days.

Journalism today, like just about every other business out there, is driven by profits and this has come at the expense of good journalism

 

[billc]

Yes. I think it has always been so, however. Remember "yellow" journalism, and the efforts to get us into and out of various wars. It is just more noticeable now because there are more ways to point out how bad journalism actually is. When you only had the major papers or the big 3 television networks (here in the U.S.) there wasn't any real way to know how bad the journalism was. Walter Kronkite was seen as a good journalist, when the truth is he was a biased hack. And I wouldn't put the BBC out there as an example of past journalistic excellence...there just wasn't anything else to compare it to, or anyone able to make the case against the BBC where it would be seen and heard...since the BBC had a true monopoly on the news.

 

[Big Don]

Is Journalism In Decline?

Yes and it has been for years.

Decades...

 

[granfire]

yep, it's been in the crapper for a long time.

it is currently so sad you can't make sense of a simple incident report anymore, the big W's screwed up into oblivion.

Then of course there is hardly any neutral reporting anymore. Everything has to have a slant.


the best writing I have seen as of late was an article put out by and extremist group, posing as news article, but being a piece of propaganda work. sad to say, I really liked it, craftsmanship was superb from what I can tell.
and before you ask: No, the slant was contrary to my believes. But I do admire good wordsmithing when I see it.


http://www.amazon.com/The-Elements-Journalism-Newspeople-Completely/dp/0307346706
I read this book a while back. Rather interesting.
It's a bit older by now, and things have sadly not improved, but the authors came to the conclusion that even journalists realize the industry is in a mess. They have the best of intentions, but I guess they all want to eat as well....

 

[ballen0351]

I personally believe its going down because of the internet and bloggers. You have 1000s of wanna be reporters filming and "reporting" on everything. So the top dogs have no choice but to try and scoop not only each other but now all the wanna be's too. So they need to be first and don't take the time to make sure everything is 100% correct. 50 years ago you only reported the news once a day in the papers or evening news so you had time to research. Now with 24 hr news stations and internet you have no time

 

[granfire]

I personally believe its going down because of the internet and bloggers. You have 1000s of wanna be reporters filming and "reporting" on everything. So the top dogs have no choice but to try and scoop not only each other but now all the wanna be's too. So they need to be first and don't take the time to make sure everything is 100% correct. 50 years ago you only reported the news once a day in the papers or evening news so you had time to research. Now with 24 hr news stations and internet you have no time

The book I linked precedes the net if I am not mistaken.

If anything, bloggers are giving the established media a run for their money, forcing them to deliver half way legible articles.

 

[Big Don]

If anything, bloggers are giving the established media a run for their money, forcing them to deliver half way legible articles.

The much maligned, and often rightly so, bloggers, did, if you recall expose the false Texas National Guard story CBS news, those "Professional Journalists" tried to foist on us weeks before a presidential election.

 

[granfire]

The much maligned, and often rightly so, bloggers, did, if you recall expose the false Texas National Guard story CBS news, those "Professional Journalists" tried to foist on us weeks before a presidential election.

Exactly my point.
They should keep the established media honest.
But it's all still news, maybe they get the memo some time this millennium!

 

[billc]

Not to mention the ACORN story that was broken by James O'keefe and not any of the major journalism outlets. Also, Fast and Furious, the Blue Dress (that story was spiked by news week) and any number of big stories that the main stream press didn't want to cover...

 

[K-man]

Some years back I was involved in a Coronial inquest into a number of deaths involving Methadone. I was interviewed by a young journalist and the article was published in one of our major papers the following day. The problem, from my point of view, was that it was almost the opposite of what I had actually said. I contacted the journalist and was told that one of the sub-editors had reduced the article to fit the available space. In doing so he had totally distorted the article.

So, it may not always be the fault of the journalist when things are wrong. It may well be a sub-editor incorrectly paraphrasing or precising an article that is accurate to begin with.
:asian:

 

[granfire]

Some years back I was involved in a Coronial inquest into a number of deaths involving Methadone. I was interviewed by a young journalist and the article was published in one of our major papers the following day. The problem, from my point of view, was that it was almost the opposite of what I had actually said. I contacted the journalist and was told that one of the sub-editors had reduced the article to fit the available space. In doing so he had totally distorted the article.

So, it may not always be the fault of the journalist when things are wrong. It may well be a sub-editor incorrectly paraphrasing or precising an article that is accurate to begin with.
:asian:

then he/she needs to be dismissed...
because, well, they suck at their job.

 

[harlan]

The great days of being a journalist are over, and it's been in decline for decades. Mostly due to economic priorities/pressures, it's stressed by owners bleeding the news teams dry, the dilution of news coverage by the competition of print with television, then station vs station, then the internet. The need for news by the public also seems to have been replaced with a voracious hunger not for detail and understanding...but for a gratification for diversion.

Fact-finding? Yesterday's 'news'...who cares.

 

[crushing]

I don't know if it is in decline or if it is just so much more difficult to find in a sea of noise and press releases regurgitated as journalism. I thought journalists had become lazy, accepting whatever little bits of information fed to them by their sources, but I'm wondering if it is simply a matter of cost savings for news organizations. I suppose there is more money to be made in being a headline 'news' aggregator that may not be able to distinguish between press releases and real news than there is to actually employ and support a team of journalists to find the facts of the story.

Too much churnalism and not enough journalism.

 

[harlan]

Pragmatically, it has always been important to get the story out first. Balancing the release of breaking news, along with in-depth follow up comes at the cost of coverage in other areas. Even the most intelligent, ethical and hard-working of journalists and editors are trapped in the current 'publish or perish' situation.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

It's a broad brush question I know and one that will vary somewhat depending on which country you are from. But I definitely feel that there is less fact-checking and application of simple common sense to reporting than there used to be - especially in the digital media.

A case in point is this simple article from the BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-23394233

We cannot expect journalists to be experts in all fields, for we ourselves are not after all but maybe they should be smart enough to ask someone who is an expert before publishing something. There are two phrases in this article which when taken together show that the writer hadn't got his brain in gear: "dropped inert bombs" and "None of the devices exploded".

In fact, I suspect that this story was lifted from elsewhere and edited a bit to avoid any publishing issues. The same story from another source carries more detail which negates the apparently redundant phrase in the BBC article:

"The U.S. 7th Fleet said in a statement on Saturday that the two AV-8B Harrier jets launched from an aircraft carrier each jettisoned an inert bomb and an unarmed explosive bomb in the World Heritage-listed marine park off Queensland state on Tuesday."

Even so, it is evidence of insufficient rigour being applied to story writing from one of the premier news sources on the planet.

I cannot speak for other countries, but in the US, it has declined noticably during my lifetime. Yellow journalism and general bad journalism aside, the trend towards tabloid news and insipid non-news being printed/broadcast as news has really had a negative effect on the quality of journalism in the US.

 

[oftheherd1]

[h=2]Is Journalism In Decline?[/h]I sure hope not. It is so low now.

I grit my teeth every time I hear something like; "The Nats made a great comeback in the seventh inning. Was it enough to win the game?" Just report the news that they won or lost, because of the success or lack of it in the 7th inning.

If they turned all those teasers into news reporting, they could put out more news, which is what I want from a news program to begin with.

Aaarrrrhhh!!!

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Is Journalism In Decline?

I sure hope not. It is so low now.

I grit my teeth every time I hear something like; "The Nats made a great comeback in the seventh inning. Was it enough to win the game?" Just report the news that they won or lost, because of the success or lack of it in the 7th inning.

If they turned all those teasers into news reporting, they could put out more news, which is what I want from a news program to begin with.

Aaarrrrhhh!!!

All those teasers are filler to disguise that they have no actual news to report. That would require actual journalism.