An Objective Truth

Objectivity: it's a mythical ideal, a sort of journalistic holy grail. To be a part of a completely neutral news force, writing and reporting articles miraculously free of bias of any kind, would be a lot like riding a unicorn- awesome, a harbinger of a  perfect world, and completely unrealistic. 

Unfortunately, not going to happen.

That doesn't mean that it's not worth striving for. Obviously, journalistic objectivity is the gold standard that every reporter should strive for. But seeing as absolute objectivity (and unicorns) don't exist, an actual standard is needed. The true definition of objectivity, then, is being able to both acknowledge and work aside bias for the sake of accurate reporting. It means recognizing that completely nonpartisan reporting is both unachievable but still worth shooting for.

Doing the impossible is just another day on the job.

This helps put a framework for how a journalist needs to function. There are lines that reporters shouldn't cross, and those that they should. The truth needs to established through dedicated reporting, fact checking, and commitment to a higher ideal. That being said, failures will be made as journalistic integrity is jettisoned in some circumstances. But the foundation of ethical journalism will create a framework that allows journalism to flourish while being held accountable by other news organizations. It's a tricky balance to achieve, but it's imperative to try. A journalistic holy grail is worth an attempt at least.

Another interesting perspective on objectivity in journalism: http://www.opendemocracy.net/media-journalismwar/article_1218.jsp

So You Want To Be A Reporter

Why would I want to be a journalist? Why would I pick a major that would disappoint my grandmother, attempt to wrest a job from an ever-shrinking workforce, and all but guarantee that my income will be too low to buy my dream house in Santa Barbara? It's because journalism is more than a profession, more than some nine-to-five grind every week. Being a journalist is a higher calling- it's a mission to the American public, to provide them with the essential, hard-hitting news they need to be participatory and informed citizens in a democracy. Given the state of America today, I feel like everyone could really use me.

40% of Americans couldn't even get off the couch this year
to vote for the freaking President of the United States.

Of course, I'll admit there's some ulterior motive here. I like being up in front of a camera and talking. And the perks of meeting interesting people, celebrities, and getting up from a desk to explore what's going on in the community are all factors. And I feel like constantly reporting on new topics will make me at least a little bit smarter. (Or at least smarter looking, but that's important too.) But at the core of it is the fact that I really want to make a difference. I don't want to spend my working hours as a blip on the radar of life. I want to be out in the world, using an intellectual machete to cut through lies and red tape, at least making some small impact on people's lives.

I want to be this kind. This kind of journalist.

They say the unexamined life is not worth living, and I want to examine life- reporting stories, exposing corruption, and being a force for justice. And you know, be on TV. Maybe that's a little bit selfish. But hey, I'm giving up my potential Santa Barbara dream house for this. That's got to be worth something here.


Even Forbes agrees with me! Check out this article to see some other reasons why journalism doesn't suck: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2012/04/16/forget-that-survey-heres-why-journalism-is-the-best-job-ever/

It's the end of the world- again

Do you remember 2009? You know, when the global pandemic known as swine flu swept uncontrollably across the globe, leaving an unimaginable trail of death and destruction in its wake? You don't remember that? Weird- if you'd been reading, listening, or watching the news, you would have equivocated the rather mild outbreak of the H1N1 virus with the beginning of the end of civilization as we know it.

Aporkalypse now! Get it? C'mon, that was a good one.

 It's obvious that this story was blown out of proportion by the media as a whole. And the reasons are pretty apparent. The news cycle is driven by 24-hour reporting, and with a constant demand for fresh talking points there is always a burden to be sensational. It's like a watered down version of yellow journalism, where the biggest and best headline wins. In a slow-news period like the spring of 2009, H1N1 broke out at just the right time. Media coverage put the fuel on the fire, and public fear ignited it like a 50-gallon drum of oil at a matches party.

Pictured above- public sentiment.

Had there been more of a sedated reaction to the swine flu scare, things could have turned out differently. Cool, unbiased reporting of the facts, not scientists' worst-case-scenario predictions, could have kept the public calm and kept fear from spreading, ironically enough, like a virus. In hindsight, we realize how overblown our fears were- the death rates for swine flu barely exceeded the usual range for seasonal illnesses. While people were infected, vaccines quickly ended the H1N1 virus. However, the paranoia generated ended up hurting airlines, theme parks, and other businesses caught up in the deluge of fear. One would hope this scare would cure the media's fondness for overhyping stories. Sure- when pigs fly.

An old CNN article takes a look back at the swine flu hype: http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/12/30/top.health.stories/index.html#cnnSTCText