Finding a New Definition Of Journalism
How do you define journalism when every blogger can have a worldwide audience? Are today’s journalists like yesterday’s pamphleteers? A discussion lead by a journalism-industry think-tank expert, a media educator, a White House columnist and a web-journalism veteran — and summit participants. Conveners: Vin Crosbie, Corante Media Hub; Jon Donley, editor NOLA.com; Helen Thomas, Hearst Newspapers; Amy Eisman, American University; Josh Wilson, NewsDesk.org.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
TWO COMMENTS ON THE REDEFINITION OF JOURNALISM
By Josh Wilson, www.newsdesk.org
Introduction: The Issue in Summary
Part One: The Ideal Article and the Open Newsroom
Part Two: The Problem of Finance, and Internet Journalism as a Return to the Roots
(This is my first wiki post anywhere, so forgive my ineptitude w/ regards to the editorial tone and first-person perspective. — jw)
Introduction
My fundamental concern here is that, although the Internet has great potential to extend the capacities of journalism as a service to democracy, it is just as vulnerable to the negative effects of commercialization as its print and broadcast forebears.
The challenge, therefore, lies not in any redefinition of journalism, but rather in the development of editorial credibility and sustainable, non-corrosive financing.
One: The Ideal Article and the Open Newsroom
Before I go into my rant about how the Internet really isn’t novel or threatening to journalism as an ideal, and requires no fundamental redefinition of what journalism is, let me offer a very short comment on how the Internet, for me, promises to extend its power.
We have to start at the granular level, with the fundamental building blocks of journalism — articles and reports.
As these essential “news elements” migrate from various static media to one that is massively networked, we have an exciting and demanding opportunity before us: to turn the online article into a starting point — a “launch pad,” if you will — for readers’ further self-education, and for civic dialogue around whatever issue is at hand.
Note that this is NOT a “redefinition” of journalism, but rather a radical extension of journalism’s possibilities.
Doing so requires more than just providing a few appropriate links. Taking the next step in journalism’s evolution demands a significant investment of time, money and courage on the part of the news producer to blow up that “black box” of reporting.
And with all this hypertext functionality, ethical dilemmas will spring up like dandelions in deep summer.
THE IDEAL ARTICLE
— The ideal article in the hypertext medium will provide access to primary sources, audio files of interviews and reporters’ notes. But while posting notes and interviews online will certainly relieve concerns about misquoting or misrepresentation, and greatly extend readers’ potential research into the issue, what if doing so inadvertently spills the beans on the next big story in the works?
— The ideal article will open a window into the process behind its production, by enabling reporters and editors to blog about the newsroom concerns and conflicts that drive their portrayals of people, institutions and issues.
— Reporters, editors and publishers will have online files readers can access revealing all potential conflicts of interest and disclosure issues. But what about rights of privacy? Should a reporter or editor disclose their political parties and voting habits? Their financial interests? The names of their confidential sources? Will such a spotlight DISCOURAGE participation in the process? Should bloggers and citizen journalists face similar demands for transparency?
— The power of blogging will be intensely magnified, as reader-engagement and response opportunities become integrated into the fabric of online publishing. Will it be a wiki? Or blogging “comments”? Or something altogether new? A fusion of the two? Personally, and for the sake of posterity and accountability, I feel the article should be open only to public comment, not public revision. Again, it should serve as a starting point for a longer conversation and ongoing investigation. If the reporter or editor updates a particular article, it should be logged and trackable.
THE OPEN NEWSROOM
— Sidebars and additional articles providing depth and context will become de rigueur, and most likely identified, ranked, sorted and posted automatically by indexing bots. But should this include articles and references other than those produced by a particular news agency? What happens if some of those articles are archived behind paid subscription vaults? How can one safely gauge the credibility of those automatically cross-referenced materials? Will entities like Google become the new “ground zero” for accessing news, by providing comprehensive, self-updating media packages that draw from a massive variety of branded editorial sources?
— Bloggers and self-publishers will increasingly provide consequential coverage of issues. In doing so, it will become necessary to ensure standards and accreditation. How are these standards to be established and enforced? Therein lies a leadership opportunity for the journalism community. The question is therefore not WHETHER a blogger is a journalist, but WHEN and HOW they are journalists.
Time will tell for all of this … and I can’t wait to get down to it! I started Newsdesk.org in a spirit of optimism for the future, and with a sense of excitement about the opportunities.
My resolve has been greatly challenged, however, by a gritty reality: Who’s going to pay for all this innovation? How does one fund it? And if it’s a media monopoly holding the purse-strings, will it ultimately amount to anything more than another crass marketing opportunity with only the illusion of participatory consequence?
Two: Back to the Future — The problem of finance, and Internet journalism as a return to the roots
I have opted for the role of contrarian on this panel. Journalism needs no redefinition. It needs a return to its roots as the entrepreneurial and, yes, collaborative impetus driving the great “conversation of democracy.”
Media technology has always radically extended this conversation, dating at least back to Gutenberg, Martin Luther, and the collaborative authors of the Federalist Papers.
The Internet is firmly within this tradition, and the notion that it is somehow a radically new thing, heretofore unanticipated and unpredictable, and requiring profound redefinitions, is an unfortunate red herring.
The real issue any media reformer must ultimately confront is commercialization, particularly by corporate monopolies.
As noted by Ben Bagdikian, Lowell Bergman and many others, commercial monopolies have an almost singular responsibility for the degradation of journalism as a service to democracy.
They filter and denature the news to maximize profitability and minimize controversy, shut out community voices, keep the black box of reportage under lock and key, and reward and reinforce the bad habits of journalists and editors who play along.
It’s true that the Internet has begun, in some ways, to counteract these problems, and renew the potential of media in service to democracy.
But don’t count your chickens before they hatch. Online media are as fully vulnerable to the negative effects of commercialization as their pulp and broadcast forebears.
In fact, the Internet represents an *opportunity* for commercial monopolies to extend their reach by using interactivity and citizen participation to reinforce existing media-consumer habits.
In other words — business as usual, only on a far more sophisticated “one-to-one” level, and, as usual, at the expense of the quality and practice of journalism itself.
No effort to reverse the pernicious decline of journalism will be complete or successful without acknowledging that the for-profit business model is broken, and that viable alternatives must be developed.
The Net is a medium and a media tool, and any journalist, editor or publisher worth their salt will make admirable use of it — provided the commercial entities that control mass media allow them to do so.
Should the yoke of commercialism be shaken off, the Internet offers an exciting opportunity for journalism to get back to its idealistic roots.
As the emergent blogosphere integrates into the mainstream — and as “citizen media” extends the civic dialogue that any responsible journalism enterprise must serve wholeheartedly — it is urgent that we attend to the fundamental concern of media ownership, monopolism and financing.
See you Thursday morning! — jw
Journalism properly is a stewardship of democracy, not a priesthood of Truth. If I hear Truth with a capital T one more time from people who are shying away from reporting on controversy due to market pressure and courtliness, I will start to cry. — Shava Nerad
Check out Tish’s blog entry about this session.