The practice of journalism

So, we have defined (or attempted to define) what a journalist actually is - but what of the practice of journalism? The readings this week looked at the role of journalism and how it has changed throughout history. The practice of journalism developed from the idea that media institutions should be seen as 'the fourth estate' - completely independent from the judiciary, government and parliament - adopting a sort of 'watchdog' role within society. However, I think it is obvious that this is no longer the case. Previous readings have showed us how the journalist can no longer be independent and that there are always pressures (financial, commercial, corporate, government) which influence the way in which journalism is now done. The Iraq War is a perfect example of how journalists are no longer able to maintain their 'watchdog' role - http://berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2004/03/18_iraqmedia.shtml - this article really highlights the point. I particularly like this section of it:

"He [Todd Gitlin] likened some war coverage – particularly that practiced by television – to a televised sporting event. Rather than journalism, it becomes entertainment. When the primary motive of media institutions becomes audience share, then these institutions "seek a rapture of attention" in order to procure as many eyeballs as possible. This, said Gitlin, conflicts with "a journalistic duty not to please," but rather to shake the safe assumptions of their audience." (Berkley News Online, 2004).

In the reading, Carey argues that journalism came about as a form of speech, a flow of conversation "that enabled the specific social formation of 'the public'" (Meadows 2008, 43). However, the question needs to be asked - who is now participating in this conversation? Are journalists really playing out their role of the fourth estate or are they simply the mouthpieces of the people paying them? I liked Gramsci's ideal of journalism, an ideal which looks to "not only satisfy all the needs of its public, but also to create and develop these needs, to arouse the public and to progressively enlarge it" (Meadow 2008, 45). Ideally, journalism should be a form of communication in which the public can participate to sustain democracy - however, as already highlighted, this is not the case.

The combining of information and entertainment has also had pretty dire effects on the practice of journalism. What constitutes news now? Is news the stories on 'Today Tonight' which describe how yoghurt can kill you? I don't think so, yet there seems to be a pretty big shift towards towards these kinds of 'human interest' stories. Oh no! Turner also believes that the move towards 'infotainment' has had detrimental effects on journalistic practices.

Journalism needs to put the public back into the practice if they want to survive in contemporary society. Gone are the days where newspapers and journalists were a persons only window to the world. New technology, like the Internet, allows almost anyone to adopt the role of a journalist. The information we want is only a click or two away - much of it is not even filtered or altered by the pressures which traditional journalistic practices are effected by. Journalism needs to change its practices pretty drastically if it is to remain relevant today.