“New Media: Continuing Questions and New Roles”
As I read chapter 9 I realized that the only reason that professional journalism (both in print and broadcast outlets) still exists is because of ethics. Information verification is keeping the profession alive, and I could not be more happy. "The ethical values of truth and inclusive access will continue to fund professional performance in this internet age." Finally, chapter 9 gave me hope for the future of journalism and for the future of my career in the field of communications.
Before reading The Virtue of Originality, I was under the impression that as long as you give credit to the source, you would be set and would not be found liable for the misuse of the sourced content. Not that I know that originality is such a big deal in this field, I understand that when you decide to use certain kinds of information, you need to be ready and willing to stand behind your decisions and defend your use of the information. Earlier in this text we discussed how "information is currency." This could not be more true after learning the prices a journalist must pay for information.
The web has "highlighted the need for journalists to take care," to avoid paying the price for information that is considered stolen or hateful. I find this to be another reason that journalism remains a profession. The job they face now is a challenge to maintain credibility in a world where facts can be published by anyone and everyone. The only way to maintain that credibility is to provide the correct information in the correct context with accuracy and truth.
Accuracy and Truth are key when it comes to sourcing and using content, these two ethical values are easily applicable to an individual's writing on first-hand accounts, but when interviews, links, and comments fall into the picture, the ethical principles of accuracy and truth become easily blurred. New Technology but Continuing Issues brought up many of these problems. I had never thought about providing links in stories as having a potential to be unethical, but "if a link is buried in a story where the reader has scrolled two or more screens there is a 95% chance they would not leave the article for the link" (Grueskin). Even comments need to be monitored for accuracy because they have the vast potential to "spread unfounded rumors and wild conspiracies".
When the concept of personalized news came up in Chapter 9, I had an easy time choosing sides. I agree with Cass Sunstein, I think that news solely catered to the individual eliminates the democratic point of view. The "Daily Me" (a personalized newspaper based on individual needs, interests, and desires) will not contribute to a democratic society; however, it will perpetuate the fragmentation of the mass media and close off an important way that citizens communicate: the news. An open and respectful dialogue is what is needed in a society where the mass media is used to unite citizens in a democracy.
I feel so strongly about an open dialogue because it has been so important to my own growth as a student. Before now, I had never been welcomed into an environment that invites and celebrates controversy and diversity. Since arriving at Loyola Chicago I have gained a profound sense of my own identity and the privilege that comes along with it. Because of the open conversations I have had with peers and teachers, I know feel an as though I am integral part of the community.
Mass Media and News Outlets need to be used to foster these healthy conversations between diverse groups. Personalized news may be convenient for the individual but it ends up fragmenting the goals of a democratic society.
I greatly appreciated the end of the chapter because it ran through two ideas for potential internet news professions: Journalist/Government partnerships and Citizen Journalists. After presenting these ideas it gave ways in which the current news system would change because of them. Thus showing that the current system - with its plethora of ethical checks and balances - was the best fit for today's society.
I am pleased to report that not all is lost in this bizarre field of communication ethics. I have hope for the future because I know now that ethical principles are guiding this profession and without them journalism would not exist. As long as professional journalists can maintain their credibility and we as citizens can hold them to a standard of truth and accuracy, I think all is well.
No comments:
Post a Comment