Tuesday, October 05, 2004

Just some random thoughts

*A journalist tries to tell the literal truth and get the facts right, does not pass along rumors, engages in verifying, and makes that verification process as transparent as possible.
*A journalist's goal is to inspire public discussion, not to help one side win or lose. One who tries to do the latter is an activist.
*Neutrality is not a core principle of journalism. But the commitment to facts, to public consideration, and to independence from faction, is.
*A journalist's loyalty to his or her audience, even above employer, is paramount.Under this definition, a lot of what we are calling media or press is not journalism and I DARE any professional journalist to try to defend any big media company of sticking to the definition above without fail.

"What is journalism? What makes a good journalist?"
Hitting the right sources and accuracy, and other things that any blogger who is used to being ripped to shreds in comments by their readers on their blog do as second nature. When you think about it, good journalism is just common sense, and I would add that compared to journalists who don't write in their name, have fact-check desks to do their fact-checking and editors to fix their grammar, bloggers are much more accountable and have to take it in the face compared to their anonymous counterparts in the mass media.
Is mass media more rigorous than blogs?
I've seen many cases where blogs have fact-checked and vetted stories that the media have just passed over.
It seems to me that blogs are a little more versatile than the mass media is. I admit that some bloggers' style and nose for news is admirable and competitive with the traditional media.


Post a Comment

<< Home