Journalology, the New Science
Charles D. Johnson
Social Forces, Vol. 6, No. 3 (Mar., 1928), pp. 382-385
In my opinion, the profession needs to clearly define it's history that is recorded from about the 1920s-30s, it's mission and it's purpose. It needs clear parameters in promoting journalistic expertise in other nations allowing it's practice without providing for impetus to revolution. The profession needs to be seen by international agencies such as the United Nations and Amnesty International as an enhancement to their missions. Through advocacy and not insistance there can be a better and safer practice that promotes knowledge of a populous. One of the best success stories of a country that moved toward democratic reform is Brazil. It didnt' happen overnight but it did happen. Progressive education of qualified journalism schools in countries that long for higher practice of expertise working in conjuction with State Departments and Foreign ministries will prevent tragic loss of life and keep promising journalists at their typewriters rather than behind bars.
Journalism can 'enhance' the movement of a society toward better quality of life, but, it can't create a government by insistance. The knowledge people have to move a society forward will bring about change, not the inspiration of violence. In my opinion, profits as a support to the profession has caused a bit of crisis. It needs to be addressed. The USA does not need it's own 'media outlets,' it needs to support those in private 'status' insuring they continue to do it autonomously and well.
From here an exploration of journalism's history and how it can better define itself in autonomy of a profession rather than a popularity contest for profits.
Good night.
Sunday, May 27, 2007
Ever hear of Farmland Preservation - New Jersey has it. Very successful program.
Statistics compiled by the American Farmland Trust, which seeks to protect farmland from non-farm development, show this about New Jersey:
While it is the fourth smallest state in area, it has spent more money than any other to buy development rights from farmers and permanently deed-restrict farm property against development. Since 1985, the state has spent $465 million in public funds and another $237 million from non-public funding sources on purchase of development rights (PDRs). It has another $137 million in the bank earmarked for spending. That is more than a quarter of all PDR spending nationally.
I propose this. A similar program to preserve 'the power of the ? hm ?' and insure our heritage is untouched except for those private 'insitutions' that have proven to be superior in it's patriotism and loyalty to the country. I like The New York Times. So, let's put it this way. What if the stockholders of The New York Times were treated as a preservation policy no different than precious New Jersey Farmland and the owners could literally sell the 'corporate' rights, as if airspace over a New York Property for 99 years. How does that sound. A profession so important to the USA that is needs preservation efforts while allowing complete freedom of the profession to thrive and do it's work as it has all these years. I think it's great idea. It can be a state program, but, I would like to see a federal program that maintains the private operations of these institutions. At the same time, journalism offices should have tax reductions no different than the fertile soils of the USA. Intellectual property rights that require tax cuts to preserves and guarantees the smooth operations of our newspapers. This could be extrapolated to media services as well should there be the desire of the profession to take it in that direction.
While it is the fourth smallest state in area, it has spent more money than any other to buy development rights from farmers and permanently deed-restrict farm property against development. Since 1985, the state has spent $465 million in public funds and another $237 million from non-public funding sources on purchase of development rights (PDRs). It has another $137 million in the bank earmarked for spending. That is more than a quarter of all PDR spending nationally.
I propose this. A similar program to preserve 'the power of the ? hm ?' and insure our heritage is untouched except for those private 'insitutions' that have proven to be superior in it's patriotism and loyalty to the country. I like The New York Times. So, let's put it this way. What if the stockholders of The New York Times were treated as a preservation policy no different than precious New Jersey Farmland and the owners could literally sell the 'corporate' rights, as if airspace over a New York Property for 99 years. How does that sound. A profession so important to the USA that is needs preservation efforts while allowing complete freedom of the profession to thrive and do it's work as it has all these years. I think it's great idea. It can be a state program, but, I would like to see a federal program that maintains the private operations of these institutions. At the same time, journalism offices should have tax reductions no different than the fertile soils of the USA. Intellectual property rights that require tax cuts to preserves and guarantees the smooth operations of our newspapers. This could be extrapolated to media services as well should there be the desire of the profession to take it in that direction.
Journalists are very powerful people. They 'handle' a process of thought that 'creates' change.
The power of the "hm?"
Model for Reflective Thinking
The foundation of higher order thinking should not be limited in focus to one's task-based performance, just as it should not be limited to a post-task activity. The foundation should have a broader range that is concerned with one's ability to rely on the operations of the mind in all circumstances to create an understanding through one's experience and knowledge when one cannot access some absolute meaning. Focus on a specific task may be the best way to learn the thinking process, and reflection on a task after it is complete is an important facet of reflective thinking practices. However, good reflective thinking, is a more encompassing process whereby an individual--aware of her own knowledge and the gaps in her knowledge, assumptions, and past experiences
-determines what information is needed for understanding the issue at hand
-accesses and gathers the available information
-gathers the opinions of reliable sources in related fields
-synthesizes the information and opinions
-considers the synthesis from all perspectives and frames of reference
-finally, creates some plausible temporary meaning that may be reconsidered and modified as she/he learns more relevant information and opinions
Model for Reflective Thinking
The foundation of higher order thinking should not be limited in focus to one's task-based performance, just as it should not be limited to a post-task activity. The foundation should have a broader range that is concerned with one's ability to rely on the operations of the mind in all circumstances to create an understanding through one's experience and knowledge when one cannot access some absolute meaning. Focus on a specific task may be the best way to learn the thinking process, and reflection on a task after it is complete is an important facet of reflective thinking practices. However, good reflective thinking, is a more encompassing process whereby an individual--aware of her own knowledge and the gaps in her knowledge, assumptions, and past experiences
-determines what information is needed for understanding the issue at hand
-accesses and gathers the available information
-gathers the opinions of reliable sources in related fields
-synthesizes the information and opinions
-considers the synthesis from all perspectives and frames of reference
-finally, creates some plausible temporary meaning that may be reconsidered and modified as she/he learns more relevant information and opinions
Journalism has to 'get past' the idea of 'Breaking News' to enhance the profession.
"We have learned that, in order to participate fully in democratic civil life, individuals must be culturally grounded, confident of their own voices, and certain of the value of their contributions. Art and culture give us this grounding.”
— Graciela Sanchez, Esperanza Peace and Justice Center
Selling newspapers should be guaranteed to any long standing publication with a reputation of providing good service to the people of this country. At every turn there are mergers, sales and chronic change within the profession. I believe the 'honest' news media is under seige. What is being done? Is the profession being wittled away by corporate takeover with faux fronts to political priorities that will come to endanger the democracy of The West? I think so.
There has to be an appreciation of the profession of journalism by the government with guarantees that some aspects of the profession will never change. It is generational reassurance that transends this country when one can point to the archives of companies like The New York Times to provide continuity of whom we are as people.
When Hurricane Katrina struck, The Times Picayune was in danger of losing it's archives. What would we do if those archives were in danger of slipping away from public assess through the sale of that paper? Where would our generational 'truths' come from? There is a part of the profession of journalism that is more than a corporate 'dream' of value. There is the value of patriotism, history and a social record that is never recorded in government. A private institution that makes government accountable to it's people. An INSTITUTION, a private institution with legislative permanence realizing the applications of law translates sometimes in embarrassing ways and needs fine tuning or elimination depending on how it affects the populous of the USA.
Reading the newspaper is reassuring to many people in the USA and I imagine the EU as well. It is reassuring to know the world is 'with us' and 'we are with them.' That cannot be truncated. If 'the truth' demanded by a professional journalistic corp were ever to end, the people that would 'control' social content reading could literally change the course of history by rewriting it. We as a country cannot allow that to happen. Journalism is the 'fourth estate' of the USA Constitution. Quite frankly, I see the 'corporate' treatment of journalism ruining the profession. I don't believe 'the truth' can be a marketable commodity so much as an awakening. Journalism is as much a part of the social structure of a populous in similar content of 'a job.' It's necessary and the life blood of an lifestyle, but, it's can't be a corporate authority that 'dictates' it's outcome.
Fears of Corporate Colonization in Journalism (click here)
This article examines almost a decade of reporting on public journalism published in the two largest and most widely read US journalism reviews: Columbia Journalism Review and American Journalism Review . It argues that instead of examining its historical underpinnings, theoretical claims, and practical manifestations, these two publications treated public journalism at best as just another manifestation of the increasing profit orientation of news media. At worst, it was scapegoated for the failings of all news organizations, including pandering to local communities and other practices that put immediate market interests ahead of democratic processes. While this description finds little support in the empirical research literature on public journalism, it may reflect mainstream journalists' increasing fears of a corporate colonization of journalism. Critics used the introduction of public journalism into newsrooms as an opportunity to express anxiety about how extra-journalistic (primarily economic) forces are encroaching upon journalists' professional autonomy and undermining the quality of news coverage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
— Graciela Sanchez, Esperanza Peace and Justice Center
Selling newspapers should be guaranteed to any long standing publication with a reputation of providing good service to the people of this country. At every turn there are mergers, sales and chronic change within the profession. I believe the 'honest' news media is under seige. What is being done? Is the profession being wittled away by corporate takeover with faux fronts to political priorities that will come to endanger the democracy of The West? I think so.
There has to be an appreciation of the profession of journalism by the government with guarantees that some aspects of the profession will never change. It is generational reassurance that transends this country when one can point to the archives of companies like The New York Times to provide continuity of whom we are as people.
When Hurricane Katrina struck, The Times Picayune was in danger of losing it's archives. What would we do if those archives were in danger of slipping away from public assess through the sale of that paper? Where would our generational 'truths' come from? There is a part of the profession of journalism that is more than a corporate 'dream' of value. There is the value of patriotism, history and a social record that is never recorded in government. A private institution that makes government accountable to it's people. An INSTITUTION, a private institution with legislative permanence realizing the applications of law translates sometimes in embarrassing ways and needs fine tuning or elimination depending on how it affects the populous of the USA.
Reading the newspaper is reassuring to many people in the USA and I imagine the EU as well. It is reassuring to know the world is 'with us' and 'we are with them.' That cannot be truncated. If 'the truth' demanded by a professional journalistic corp were ever to end, the people that would 'control' social content reading could literally change the course of history by rewriting it. We as a country cannot allow that to happen. Journalism is the 'fourth estate' of the USA Constitution. Quite frankly, I see the 'corporate' treatment of journalism ruining the profession. I don't believe 'the truth' can be a marketable commodity so much as an awakening. Journalism is as much a part of the social structure of a populous in similar content of 'a job.' It's necessary and the life blood of an lifestyle, but, it's can't be a corporate authority that 'dictates' it's outcome.
Fears of Corporate Colonization in Journalism (click here)
This article examines almost a decade of reporting on public journalism published in the two largest and most widely read US journalism reviews: Columbia Journalism Review and American Journalism Review . It argues that instead of examining its historical underpinnings, theoretical claims, and practical manifestations, these two publications treated public journalism at best as just another manifestation of the increasing profit orientation of news media. At worst, it was scapegoated for the failings of all news organizations, including pandering to local communities and other practices that put immediate market interests ahead of democratic processes. While this description finds little support in the empirical research literature on public journalism, it may reflect mainstream journalists' increasing fears of a corporate colonization of journalism. Critics used the introduction of public journalism into newsrooms as an opportunity to express anxiety about how extra-journalistic (primarily economic) forces are encroaching upon journalists' professional autonomy and undermining the quality of news coverage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
The NO spin zone. Permanently a no spin zone. No endangering people or their journalists.
China is a country of a billion people. So is India. It is skeptical as to whether those populous will ever achieve the quality of life of the USA. I find this demonstration which took on a violent 'tone' leading to endangering the participants unfortunate. The journalists that are part of China's 'news corp' can add to the quality of life by working within political directives. It is upto the profession in other nations that enjoy a somewhat 'higer standard/rating' to seek legislation that 'brings on' the issue of journalism internationally for a professional result that adds incentive for change in any country as it can be accommodated by the authorities there.
The State Departments, Ministeries of nations able to facilitate a 'FREER press' in countries capable of providing it have to provide guidelines for the practice. The Safe Practice. Promoting unrest recklessly without good alternatives in government can lead to anarchy and with a population of one billion people that is a lot hardship. Responsible journalism that brings the issues of the populous to the attention of authority without risk of disrupting the society so much that it can't care of it's people is the only way a professional standard can be developed. This isn't pity. It is knowing the power of knowledge, the power of information, the power of motivation and applying it responsibly.
Countries with different structure than the USA, the EU, Australia and the like need to ALLOW a transcendence of the 'authority' of journalism that provides quality of life. In the USA the politics are the 'release' for the change people seek. In countries like China, respect of authority while bring people closer to that authority and will move mountains without victimizing the professionals that seek a better life for the towns, city, hamlets and villages. Countries like China and Russia get such a bad rap from the press in countries they trade with that it causes a deterioration of the quality of life within it's borders. These countries don't need diminishment of their poeple, they need a higher dignity placed on them.
Bridging the professional gap between journalism and government while promoting positive experiences of press corps internationally will make the journalistic experience more fulfilling for all people. I have yet to see 'on the ground' promotion of the 2008 Olympics from Chinese journalists that can provide insight and interviews from the 'workers' in China that took pride in their efforts to make it all possible. Why?
During riots
Tiananmen incident ... workers clean the picture of Chairman Mao at the entrance to the Forbidden City in Beijing.
On Saturday, May 12, an unemployed Xinjiang man lobbed an incendiary device at the iconic portrait of Mao Zedong that hangs over the entrance to the Forbidden City (or the Palace Museum as the Chinese call it). Here's a photograph, taken on a mobile phone camera, of Mao's portrait burning. The witness who took the photograph was driving by moments after the painting caught alight and said he saw flames coming from the bottom of the portrait, then some sort of foam shooting upwards, presumably from the fire brigade, to extinguish the fire, then just the smoke.
In the south-west, villagers have been rioting over oppressive enforcement of China's one-child policy. Coverage of both events was censored within China, but footage of the rioting in Guangxi has been widely posted on blogs accessible in Hong Kong, which although returned to Chinese rule in 1997, under the one country, two systems deal worked out with the British, enjoys a greater deal of press and other freedoms for the first 50 years of its post-colonial life.
International media such as CNN have also broadcast footage of the aftermath of the rioting, but predictably whenever the story was promoted as ''coming up next'', or the footage shown, the television screen went blank, although technical glitches meant mainland viewers still got the announced headline of the story. Such clumsy censorship is common on any stories considered sensitive by the Government, despite satellite or cable stations such as CNN and BBC (the BBC website is banned in China, although the broadcast station is not) being ostensibly only permitted in diplomatic compounds, residential areas where foreigners live, big hotels etc, far away from the eyes of most ordinary Chinese. But of course this is China, and anyone who wants satellite television can simply pay for a dish ... hence the need to censor sensitive topics in case such events - as rioting villagers fed up with corrupt or overzealous bureaucrats - gets too widely disseminated and creates flow-on social unrest, ie. gives people ideas.
The Government's justification for censorship is that its overriding interest is to maintain social order. In the case of the attack on Mao's portrait, many Chinese, who still respect and even revere the late paramount leader who, for all his subsequent mistakes, restored China's pride after a century of humiliation at the hands of Western powers, would be outraged. And many people understand and accept, even if they don't like, the Government's one-child policy because as people are wont to say ''it is for the good of the nation''. The issue in Guangxi appears to be not so much the policy as such but the corrupt and brutal way the authorities chose to enforce and collect fines. So why can't the Chinese public be allowed to know of and debate such issues?
The State Departments, Ministeries of nations able to facilitate a 'FREER press' in countries capable of providing it have to provide guidelines for the practice. The Safe Practice. Promoting unrest recklessly without good alternatives in government can lead to anarchy and with a population of one billion people that is a lot hardship. Responsible journalism that brings the issues of the populous to the attention of authority without risk of disrupting the society so much that it can't care of it's people is the only way a professional standard can be developed. This isn't pity. It is knowing the power of knowledge, the power of information, the power of motivation and applying it responsibly.
Countries with different structure than the USA, the EU, Australia and the like need to ALLOW a transcendence of the 'authority' of journalism that provides quality of life. In the USA the politics are the 'release' for the change people seek. In countries like China, respect of authority while bring people closer to that authority and will move mountains without victimizing the professionals that seek a better life for the towns, city, hamlets and villages. Countries like China and Russia get such a bad rap from the press in countries they trade with that it causes a deterioration of the quality of life within it's borders. These countries don't need diminishment of their poeple, they need a higher dignity placed on them.
Bridging the professional gap between journalism and government while promoting positive experiences of press corps internationally will make the journalistic experience more fulfilling for all people. I have yet to see 'on the ground' promotion of the 2008 Olympics from Chinese journalists that can provide insight and interviews from the 'workers' in China that took pride in their efforts to make it all possible. Why?
During riots
Tiananmen incident ... workers clean the picture of Chairman Mao at the entrance to the Forbidden City in Beijing.
On Saturday, May 12, an unemployed Xinjiang man lobbed an incendiary device at the iconic portrait of Mao Zedong that hangs over the entrance to the Forbidden City (or the Palace Museum as the Chinese call it). Here's a photograph, taken on a mobile phone camera, of Mao's portrait burning. The witness who took the photograph was driving by moments after the painting caught alight and said he saw flames coming from the bottom of the portrait, then some sort of foam shooting upwards, presumably from the fire brigade, to extinguish the fire, then just the smoke.
In the south-west, villagers have been rioting over oppressive enforcement of China's one-child policy. Coverage of both events was censored within China, but footage of the rioting in Guangxi has been widely posted on blogs accessible in Hong Kong, which although returned to Chinese rule in 1997, under the one country, two systems deal worked out with the British, enjoys a greater deal of press and other freedoms for the first 50 years of its post-colonial life.
International media such as CNN have also broadcast footage of the aftermath of the rioting, but predictably whenever the story was promoted as ''coming up next'', or the footage shown, the television screen went blank, although technical glitches meant mainland viewers still got the announced headline of the story. Such clumsy censorship is common on any stories considered sensitive by the Government, despite satellite or cable stations such as CNN and BBC (the BBC website is banned in China, although the broadcast station is not) being ostensibly only permitted in diplomatic compounds, residential areas where foreigners live, big hotels etc, far away from the eyes of most ordinary Chinese. But of course this is China, and anyone who wants satellite television can simply pay for a dish ... hence the need to censor sensitive topics in case such events - as rioting villagers fed up with corrupt or overzealous bureaucrats - gets too widely disseminated and creates flow-on social unrest, ie. gives people ideas.
The Government's justification for censorship is that its overriding interest is to maintain social order. In the case of the attack on Mao's portrait, many Chinese, who still respect and even revere the late paramount leader who, for all his subsequent mistakes, restored China's pride after a century of humiliation at the hands of Western powers, would be outraged. And many people understand and accept, even if they don't like, the Government's one-child policy because as people are wont to say ''it is for the good of the nation''. The issue in Guangxi appears to be not so much the policy as such but the corrupt and brutal way the authorities chose to enforce and collect fines. So why can't the Chinese public be allowed to know of and debate such issues?
Title: INTERNAL FRAGMENTATION OF THE NEWS.
Any profession has to have control over their standards and expertise in order to maintain them. How can the profession of journalism 'pass on' the necessary requirements in other venues of other countries if it hasn't maintained a standard 'thread' throughout the profession. There is a huge difference between daily news and tabloids, yet they are all lumped together under one umbrella of journalism. I don't consider "Lad Mags" a professional journal, BUT, there is nothing saying they cannot have profound articles and well paid professionals writing investigative journalism to 'bring up' the profession across the board. "Specializing" in entertainment has it's benefit, but, there has to be a way of translating that enjoyment into a serious tone that connects to a profession of excellance within the content of such publications and broadcasts. Professionalism has to be a part of Playgirl and a lead to an enthusiam that brings the readership to the front pages of The New York Times other than once a month. It's a form of outreach to benefit the profession as well as the circulation of magazines. Respect the reader and they will thrive under the professional standards that are enforced through ethics. Quality newsprint in every venue, audio rendition and visual media. A QUALITY that international authorities can recognize and strive to meet.
Ben-Porath, Eran N.
Source:
Journalism Studies; Aug2007, Vol. 8 Issue 3, p414-431, 18p
Unlike the edited news package, which dominates network and local news in America, the cable news channels recount the day's news predominantly through conversation, a format dubbed here dialogical news. At the center of this article is the concept of internal fragmentation, a consequence of the turn to conversation-based reporting, and its central implications: (1) the authority of the news reporter diminishes; (2) question-asking replaces fact-checking; (3) news organizations relinquish their accountability for news content; and (4) the news audience assumes the role of witness or participant rather than receiver. As dialogical news becomes prominent in the repertoire of viewers, short- and long-term prospects are suggested here. In the short-run, journalists are losing their battle to control their sources and maintain their gatekeeping function. In the long run, journalism might lose its significance as society's reflexive storyteller, reverting instead to its former role as a partisan instrument, a source of entertainment or a bit of both. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Ben-Porath, Eran N.
Source:
Journalism Studies; Aug2007, Vol. 8 Issue 3, p414-431, 18p
Unlike the edited news package, which dominates network and local news in America, the cable news channels recount the day's news predominantly through conversation, a format dubbed here dialogical news. At the center of this article is the concept of internal fragmentation, a consequence of the turn to conversation-based reporting, and its central implications: (1) the authority of the news reporter diminishes; (2) question-asking replaces fact-checking; (3) news organizations relinquish their accountability for news content; and (4) the news audience assumes the role of witness or participant rather than receiver. As dialogical news becomes prominent in the repertoire of viewers, short- and long-term prospects are suggested here. In the short-run, journalists are losing their battle to control their sources and maintain their gatekeeping function. In the long run, journalism might lose its significance as society's reflexive storyteller, reverting instead to its former role as a partisan instrument, a source of entertainment or a bit of both. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
EMERGING MODELS OF JOURNALISTIC AUTHORITY IN MTV'S COVERAGE OF THE 2004 US PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.
Somehow the Founding Father's of Journalism didn't imagine MTV as an authority. I realize in order to 'stimulate' voters to go to the polls it can be a 'trendy' issue. Rock the vote and all that, but, in all honesty whom is going to host this 'walk on the wild side' for journalism. It is a concern that 'trends' can 'take authority' in a profession so vital to connecting people to their own authority in expressing their vote. There needs to be a moderator capacity of the profession for new venues to maintain a 'standard.'
During the 2004 US presidential campaign, MTV produced an intriguing series of news reports, documentaries, and other programming designed to educate its youthful audience about the presidential election and democratic politics. The Choose or Lose series was an unlikely discursive blend, mixing MTV's usual fare of music, celebrity, and style, with serious information, issue coverage, and social advocacy. It also experimented with the parameters of journalistic authority, combining elements drawn from a traditional paradigm of professional journalism with a variety of alternative, emergent claims to credibility, in the hope of reaching a demographic that largely has "tuned out" from news and politics. To explore the changing nature of journalistic authority as articulated on MTV News, this study first develops a theory of discursive integration - the blending of once-distinct discursive domains, standards, and styles. It then identifies five potential models of journalistic authority constructed in the Choose or Lose series. It concludes by considering the implications of discursive integration and the ongoing re-conceptualization of journalistic authority for young people's engagement with broadcast journalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
I looked through some professional journals to define the profession
It was diffuse. The profession has been very fluid and I am not sure it for the better or it's survival.
I believe practicing in multi-media is fine, it reaches readership. But, the fluidity of the profession in the year 2007 has brought a casualness to it that I believe falls outside the practice. Accepted. Sure, but, is it really journalism or the dumming down of the profession.
Are there ethical reviews of journalists as in the practice of law? There probably should be with an increase and not decrease in the specialty of 'investigative' journalism. It's disturbing to find the profession is moving away from the venue.
Journalism requires honesty and good faith (click on title)
By ROSEMARY MCLEODIt's no surprise that Kevin McNeil, son of murdered Tokoroa teacher Lois Dear, would get death threats. We like to crush people who speak out.
McNeil has had malicious calls since his mother's death, he revealed last week. Such bullying would have silenced many people, but he refused to tone down his victim impact statement at the killer's sentencing in spite of them.
Admittedly his initial outbursts were a bit rugged. He said he wanted the killer to "swing off the nearest tree". But by the time he made the statement that really mattered, time had passed, and he'd become more reasonable.
Who are the people who make furtive calls like this? I suspect they come from the same pool as people who write mean-spirited letters to newspapers, and to journalists. The late great Frank Haden used to insist that they all live in boarding houses, taking pen (red biro) to paper on wet Sundays when they have nothing to do but brood. The most virulent usually don't sign their offerings, and write in capital letters. Now that they have the internet to rant on, you rather miss that red ink. It gave fair warning.
The casual malice of such mail still gets to me sometimes; it can overpower kind and reasonable correspondence on a bad day. I always imagine its authors' families, postmen, neighbours, and the local body politicians they surely harass over easement disputes and stray cats. Why don't they take up something useful, like canasta, and give us all a break?
Last week I confessed in this column that I'd wept over an unpleasant magazine article targeting people I knew.
I believe practicing in multi-media is fine, it reaches readership. But, the fluidity of the profession in the year 2007 has brought a casualness to it that I believe falls outside the practice. Accepted. Sure, but, is it really journalism or the dumming down of the profession.
Are there ethical reviews of journalists as in the practice of law? There probably should be with an increase and not decrease in the specialty of 'investigative' journalism. It's disturbing to find the profession is moving away from the venue.
Journalism requires honesty and good faith (click on title)
By ROSEMARY MCLEODIt's no surprise that Kevin McNeil, son of murdered Tokoroa teacher Lois Dear, would get death threats. We like to crush people who speak out.
McNeil has had malicious calls since his mother's death, he revealed last week. Such bullying would have silenced many people, but he refused to tone down his victim impact statement at the killer's sentencing in spite of them.
Admittedly his initial outbursts were a bit rugged. He said he wanted the killer to "swing off the nearest tree". But by the time he made the statement that really mattered, time had passed, and he'd become more reasonable.
Who are the people who make furtive calls like this? I suspect they come from the same pool as people who write mean-spirited letters to newspapers, and to journalists. The late great Frank Haden used to insist that they all live in boarding houses, taking pen (red biro) to paper on wet Sundays when they have nothing to do but brood. The most virulent usually don't sign their offerings, and write in capital letters. Now that they have the internet to rant on, you rather miss that red ink. It gave fair warning.
The casual malice of such mail still gets to me sometimes; it can overpower kind and reasonable correspondence on a bad day. I always imagine its authors' families, postmen, neighbours, and the local body politicians they surely harass over easement disputes and stray cats. Why don't they take up something useful, like canasta, and give us all a break?
Last week I confessed in this column that I'd wept over an unpleasant magazine article targeting people I knew.
Journalism
I don't do this for sport everyday. I do it because I have long respected a profession vital to the democracy of the USA. It has been badly bruised and beaten since 2000 and there needs to be a reassessment of the practive domestically.
Since this administration has taken office the deaths and jailing of journalists globally has skyrocketed. This is the life blood of hope for people of all nations. For that reason I intend to attempt to begin a dialogue on what is best for the profession. The reason for the scrutiny of journalists internationally is not so much terrorist influence in societies but more the tightening of boarders and closing any chance that authority is challenged by unrest. The reason is simple. The Bush/Cheney administration is a threat, a known threat to global stability and the damage is directly related in the need of countries to define their sovereignty and reign in any discension. Hence. Journalism is the first rhelm of oppression.
To begin I see a broader responsibility for a profession in terms of setting up panels to develop guidelines for 'behavior' of journalists in the USA and a broad. Domestically the role of journalists need to be broadened and court decisions challenged. Internationally I propose a 'rating system' based in literacy or illiteracy, government and laws, population of the country and overall expertise of those that practice the profession within any country. A support if you will to develop an education process that can be measurable in diplomatic dealings to advance the profession in a responsible way along with the development of the country.
I don't see countries advancing without a press in place to connect people to their lifestyle choices, their government and social advances.
With a global rating system, the State Department can be held responsible in legislation to answer to the press organization of the USA as to the adverse arrests, detentions and deaths of collegues while demanding the 'art of journalism' be promoted along with and no different than child labor laws and environemental standards.
"Write it down" by George Strait
Write this down
Write this down
I never saw the end in sight
Fools are kind of blind
Thought everything was going alright
But I was running out of time
cause you had one foot out the door
I swear I didnt see
But if youre rally going away
Heres some final words from me
Stick it on your frigerator door
Hang it in a picture frame up above the mantel
Where you'll see it for sure
You can find a chisel, I can find a stone
Folks will be reading these words, long after were gone
Baby, write this down, take a little note
To remind you in case you didnt know
Tell yourself I love you and I dont want you to go
Write this down
You can find a chisel, I can find a stone
Folks will be reading these words, long after were gone
Take my words, readem everday
Keepem close by dont you letem fade away
So youll remember what I forgot to say
Write this down
Ill sign it at the bottom of this page
Ill swear under oath
cause every single word is true
And I think you need to know
So use it as a bookmark
Stick it on your frigerator door
Hang it in a picture frame up above the mantel
Where youll see it for sure
Stick it on your frigerator door
Hang it in a picture frame up above the mantel
Where you'll see it for sure
You can find a chisel, I can find a stone
Folks will be reading these words, long after we're gone
You can find a chisel, I can find a stone
Folks will be reading these words, long after we're gone
Oh I love you and I dont want you to go
Baby write this down
Write this down
I never saw the end in sight
Fools are kind of blind
Thought everything was going alright
But I was running out of time
cause you had one foot out the door
I swear I didnt see
But if youre rally going away
Heres some final words from me
Stick it on your frigerator door
Hang it in a picture frame up above the mantel
Where you'll see it for sure
You can find a chisel, I can find a stone
Folks will be reading these words, long after were gone
Baby, write this down, take a little note
To remind you in case you didnt know
Tell yourself I love you and I dont want you to go
Write this down
You can find a chisel, I can find a stone
Folks will be reading these words, long after were gone
Take my words, readem everday
Keepem close by dont you letem fade away
So youll remember what I forgot to say
Write this down
Ill sign it at the bottom of this page
Ill swear under oath
cause every single word is true
And I think you need to know
So use it as a bookmark
Stick it on your frigerator door
Hang it in a picture frame up above the mantel
Where youll see it for sure
Stick it on your frigerator door
Hang it in a picture frame up above the mantel
Where you'll see it for sure
You can find a chisel, I can find a stone
Folks will be reading these words, long after we're gone
You can find a chisel, I can find a stone
Folks will be reading these words, long after we're gone
Oh I love you and I dont want you to go
Baby write this down
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)