Looking Back

We started the semester off by answering the question: Who is a journalist? There are many answers to this question, and varying opinions. Here is the elementary version http://www.robertniles.com/journalism/ of the answer to that question. If you’re looking for a more refined answer to that question you can see here: http://www.thenewsmanual.net/Manuals%20Volume%201/volume1_02.htm. for  But if you’d like to see my reformed answer, read on:
As my journalism class has progressed, my definition of who a journalist is has been shaped and has now evolved into something new. In my first blog I said ‘journalists don’t just have a job, they have a passion.’ This is something I believe even more firmly than the day I wrote my first blog. While my view of what and who a journalist is hasn’t completely changed, I believe my definition of journalists now consists of some added elements. While a journalist doesn’t just have to be someone who writes for the New York Times, they can come in many shapes and sizes, but I see now that the title and career of journalists is much more complex than someone who is a good writer and tries to report the truth to the public. A journalist is a person with unique experiences and views, but who above all, values the truth. A journalist is not a robot who comes into a situation completely unbiased, but they work to control their biases while digging into subjects they are passionate about and try and convey that passion to society.
One thing I have really come to appreciate about journalists and have learned in this class is that a journalist must define words like loyalty and patriotism on a day to day basis. For example, if a journalist believes their loyalty is to their country, does loyalty include exposing something their country is doing wrong in a situation? While there may be a code of ethics (see here: http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp for  for examples of journalism ethics) there is no real rule book on gray area topics or situations for journalists to follow. Therefore, it is a tricky profession in society, an interesting position and a huge responsibility. Journalists must be entertaining, but not entertainers. They cannot be producing stories for the sake of the production. The truth of the stories they report on must be at the heart of their purpose.
I think the most important thing I’ve learned this semester is how complex journalism really is. Those who choose to be journalists have an exciting career ahead, but a career filled with big choices and ‘hard calls.’ A journalist has the opportunity to be a light to the world exposing good and holding up justice and truth, or they have the option to be white negative noise, exposing the bad of society and highlighting only those who do not make good choices. So I guess among the vast list of other titles, a journalist is a decision maker, one who must choose to use their career for good or evil.
So in conclusion of the question, I think a journalist is a person of courage, courage to set aside their biases and enter a situation, prepared and willing to put the time in to discover and share the truth. To do so they must have a passion and a love for their work. They are a person who serves the public and keeps society safe from schemes and exposes the wrongs of officials. A journalist can chose to be a villain, but ultimately when decisions are made wisely they are a society hero.

Celebrity Journalism

This week’s reading in our journalism class was on the topic of “The Journalist as Celebrity,” The Mind of a Journalist.  Now when I first read this title I was wondering is this talking about how the journalist is a celebrity, is this talking about journalism reporting on celebrities, or is this talking about how journalism can make people celebrities?  As I read, I came to find out it touched on a variety of these points.  It brought up some very interesting points such as the news reporting on celebrities and how at times journalists become like celebrities, which in turn their presence reporting on the news affects the news being reported on.  These ideas struck my interest and I decided I wanted to learn more about how celebrities and journalists go together.  I will touch on three points: reporting on celebrities, the journalists as celebrities, and our news making people celebrities.

As I began my search to learn more about this, the first website I found can be seen here: http://becomeacelebrityjournalist.com/.  When I first clicked there I thought I would find tips on how a journalist could become a celebrity, however, the website was geared to how you could report on celebrities.  Ultimately, I came to find the website was mostly information on material you can purchase that teaches you how to be a journalist of celebrities.  Though this raised a question in my mind that we’ve been discussing the past few weeks in our class, is this reporting on celebrities lives really journalism, or is it just entertainment?  Is news like what is found in this clip from ABC news: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQRhmO9ZNXg, really of importance to our community?  This is not something I expect to come to a conclusion on, but is something I continue to debate in my mind.  If I were to become a journalist, I would hope to report and bring to the attention of our society more than what celebrity break up happened this past weekend.  However, if I’m being honest I’m also a consumer of the news produced and sometimes I do like to hear what is happening in celebrities lives.  Therefore, this will likely be an ongoing challenge for journalists everywhere.

My second point is how journalists become celebrities.  As I turned to the internet to find out more on this subject I came across this article: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/03/journalists-become-self-reverential-celebrities/?page=all

It touches on the many familiar faces of widely known journalists and how their journalism has led them to lead celebrity like lives.  It also touches on how journalists become part of the celebrity culture.  If I were to continue on to be a journalist it makes me question whether or not this type of a shift in lifestyle is overall beneficial to my personal life and career.  On one hand, when you are recognized as a celebrity presence reporting at the scene it changes the way people act.  On the other hand, the more well known you are as a journalist, the more legitimacy you carry in your reporting which if you are reporting on the ‘little people’ your celebrity like position may give them more of a voice.  Again, this is not an issue I expect to come to a firm conclusion on, but ideas to think about.

My final point is how the people and stories journalists choose to report on could become a celebrity as a result of the reporting on them.  We all know this news cast: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzNhaLUT520. This brought fame and fortune to Antoine Dodson, granted it was because of the music video that followed, but regardless this news cast brought him into the light.  He became a celebrity making a wide variety of appearances, and even people like me lining up to take pictures with him:

This article: http://hiphopwired.com/2010/09/28/antoine-dodson-gets-the-chance-to-meet-producers-who-made-him-famous-22222/ discusses how Antoine met the people who made him a celebrity.  I enjoyed the music video and ultimately this gives journalists a unique responsibility to high-light certain stories and people that may develop into celebrities as a result.  I hope that as a journalist I would take the time to display the most admirable people on the news and use my job to give public recognition to worth while people.  While I understand we must report on the ‘not so admirable’ people in our society, I still hope in most cases I would recognize the power in my job as a journalist and give a voice to those who deserve to be heard.

Infotainment

Something that really sparked my interest this past week in both our journalism class discussion and reading was the idea and concept of ‘infotainment’ in which journalists attempt to provide information while keeping it entertaining to retain viewers.  Sometimes this obviously results in losing real news stories and just focusing on what will bring in viewers, the outrageous entertaining stories.  In class we talked about whether or not infotainment was a good strategy or appropriate to have in our news.  I decided for this post that I wanted to learn more about this concept and what others in the profession had to add to the conversation.

When I first began researching I came across this website: http://discuss.epluribusmedia.net/scream%20of%20the%20peacock.  I was not familiar with this website initially but I came to find interesting arguments and a full array of conversation concerning infotainment journalism.  The portion I liked most was the discussion on ‘what is news and where do I find it?’  It talked about how the shift of news stations and reporters viewing citizens and readers as consumers has effected the industry and news produced immensely.  Citizens are being viewed as consumers of not just traditional news stories, but of entertaining stories.  The discussion from this website added how, ‘viewing us as “consumers” has heralded a new era in “news,” wherein news has become infotainment and ratings are based on “market share” rather than the quality of the information being imparted.’  I thought this was an interesting idea and simply added to my knowledge from our class discussion.

So how as journalists do we get around this idea when giving people valid news is our own personal goal and yet what is being offered and even consumed are these high entertainment stories.  As mentioned earlier, I wanted to hear more from what professional journalists had to say on this matter.  I found this journalism debate on youtube and found it very enlightening http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qr0WLm9CjMc.  I loved what was said about how often the stories in the newspaper are about the ongoing politics and how readers often want the extremist stories.  I liked this part, because as a journalism student I want to uncover the news, the bad things that are going on in our country that are affecting all of us, but are not being uncovered.  As a journalist, that is our role to write about and this is what I would want to share with the American people.  However, if I’m being honest as a citizen and a reader, when I pick up the newspaper my eyes go to the outrageous story, or the story about facebook.  Each day I read in the New York Times stories like the following: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/30/us/justice-anthony-m-kennedy-may-be-key-to-health-law-ruling.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper.  These stories are important for the American people to have and to know, but it seems like often there will be stories like this that go on for months and finally they will come to a big conclusion but until then it’s taxing to read all the details each day when you’re busy.  This brings me to the fact that I too am not helping the situation and often turn to the entertainment packed stories.

So how as journalists do we help remedy this? How do we help the people ofAmericawant to read informational stories?  We must do as we discussed in class ‘write the article like a story,’ as shared in class,

“Who becomes character.  What becomes plot.  Where becomes scene or setting.  Why becomes motivation or causation.  How becomes narrative”- Roy Peter Clark.

My search to learn more about this area has led me to hope that if I continue on in this field, I hope to write the valid news in an entertaining way so that our news doesn’t just result in outrageous headlines like this man who endeavors to cover all the outrageous news in the day: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAY_kmaVycQ.

Solutions Journalism

On Friday, I attended a lecture by David Bornstein, who is a journalist for the New York Times and social innovation author.  I found this lecture incredibly enlightening and interesting.  Being a beginning journalism student and no sure plans to continue on in the field, I did not really have any knowledge on the subject of what solutions journalism was, or was even about.  However, I came away with the knowledge of not only what it was, but also a great appreciation for it.

Bornstein talked about how often journalists think that by shining a light on the bad things that happen in communities, it will generate a solution through highlighting flaws in society.  In the lecture and discussion, it was brought up how there truly is so much doom and gloom news and that journalists and reporters then try to create a balance by putting in the hero stories at the end.  We see websites like this: http://www.happynews.com/, where there is overcompensation for things that are good, but there are not really solutions to these world problems, it’s just fluff.

My understanding of Bornstein’s intentions and solution journalism is focused on reporting the problem in the world and what is being done to fix it and the good that is coming from these innovative solutions.  I think this is such an intelligent approach to solving problems in society and the world.  It was also talked about that as a journalist; you are always trying to look in a different direction than those people around you.  Because so many people were looking at the bad things in society and the problems, Bornstein chose to look in a different direction and has discovered that some of the greatest innovations in society are not being covered.

I think one of the most ‘ah ha’ moments for me in this lecture was when it was discussed how good news doesn’t sale, but then Bornstein said it doesn’t because it’s not always real news, but what is so popular right now is making change and social influence.  That is exactly why solutions do sale and are beneficial.  Bornstein gave us a few examples of authors who have chosen to purse the solutions path.  If you would like to see an example of one of his colleagues work that he referred us to, click here: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/24/an-electronic-eye-on-hospital-hand-washing/.

If you would like to learn more about solutions journalism, see the website actually founded by Bornstein http://dowser.org/.  I found it incredibly interesting and it helped me get more excited about the power that positive and solutions journalism can have.

 

Argument Culture

Something that has sparked my interest from our journalism reading and class discussion was the idea that we discussed of the ‘argument culture.’  I decided for this post I wanted to learn more about this idea and aspect of society.  With the many different shifts in technology and journalism, it is interesting to see and think about the shift that has happened to an interactive and argumentative news.  This may be due to the shift of news to a more interactive medium, with people able to post and publicize their passionate opinions.

However, it may not just be the result of more passionate opinions being published in society, it may be an entire idea and concept that society has to offer, the constant need to argue about anything and everything.  As I began thinking about this idea, I came across this article: http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/tannend/argsake.htm.  It was written by, Deborah Tannen, the author of the book: The Argument Culture: Stopping America’s War of Words.  The article I’ve linked to was an article she wrote about her book.  I think my favorite point that she brought up was how war oriented our society is.  Think about the media we watch including titles like: Star Wars, the Mommy Wars, the Baby Wars, the Mammography Wars.  I began to realize this societal argumentative style is more subtle, yet pervasive, than I had initially realized.

Which then raised the question, does this argumentative style have a valid and needed place in journalism?  After reading about the topic, I have come to the conclusion that it depends on the problem and the situation.  I believe my view is illustrated best in this clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOc4XgBespw.  I think the story that is being reported on is a valid area to have some arguments.  I like that both of those involved got to speak their piece and while the issue could have been talked out more, I thought it reported to the public both the issue and both sides.  However, the argumentative style brought on between the journalists I found highly inappropriate.   I thought it was both distracting and unprofessional.  I believe arguments like that do not have a place in journalism because they do not better society.

This led me to wonder what I can do as a citizen and a journalism student to not contribute to a already contemptuous trend of our society.  I think it goes back to our discussion in my class about being a light to the world, like it talks about in the Bible.  If we are able to seek out uplifting stories, maybe even that highlight compromise, such as these stories: http://articles.baltimoresun.com/keyword/compromise from the Baltimore Sun.  If we produce pieces that show compromise happening, maybe as journalists, we can make America appear more true to itself, moderation in all things, this will be a way in which we can contribute peace to the news room.

Watch Dog!

Watchdog journalism, to me, seems to just hit right at the heart of what the first Amendment was talking about with ‘freedom of the press.’  The ability to keep the leaders above us in check.  The right to write what needs to be written and expose scandals of those in power.  After our assigned reading in our journalism class and our class discussion, I decided I really wanted to learn more about watchdog journalism.  The first thing I wanted to do was learn what professional journalists had said most recently about this area of journalism.  The first thing that caught my attention was this article: http://www.poynter.org/how-tos/leadership-management/what-great-bosses-know/67742/watchdog-culture-why-you-need-it-how-you-can-build-it/.  While it wasn’t written super recently, it was updated this month which tells me the principles journalists can take from it are still up to date.  In this article, it discusses how there was a large meeting of editors and journalists to decide how they could better create a culture and environment in the news room so that watchdog journalism could thrive.  I really liked all the points this article discussed.  It helped me to further realize that watchdog journalism doesn’t just happen, it’s not an area that you’re likely to stumble upon, you must be doing, as the name suggests, watching and waiting.  I also liked that this article pointed out that it must be a goal within the news room, if this type of journalism is to flourish, everyone must be on board for a watch dog story to be achieved.

The next question I was really interested in learning more about concerning watchdog journalism is how it is changing.  I know that print journalism is evolving and always changing, so how is this changing investigative journalism?  I found this site: http://www.paleycenter.org/mc-watchdog-journalism-center-for-public-integrity/  which offered an almost hour long clip on how the digital revolution was affecting this kind of journalism.  One point I really liked that they hit on was how this digital age was allowing watchdog journalism and journalists to make connections like never before.  The digital area was making connections for journalists so they could take leads further.  I liked this because it seems to me that with so many social media sites, blogs, and almost white noise on the internet, it would be hard to narrow down your leads and really sort through all the extra things, however, the computer is making small connections for journalists.  I also liked how this particular site and clip illustrate how every area of journalism is always evolving and changing and ultimately journalists and technologists are becoming one in the same.  I thought that was interesting and that helps me to understand while journalists should be knowledgeable about each new technology coming forth so we can stay current and go deeper.

Finally, I wanted to learn simple points on how to do watch dog journalism.  To answer that question I was excited when I found this clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sxf90TXThY8.  I liked that this clip was simple and gave easy points to remember if you are going into the journalism field.  One of which was to hold people accountable.  An example they gave was if President Obama is using federal money not as he said it would be used, not only is it okay for journalists to say he’s breaking a promise, it is their duty to point out a promise has been broken.

Watchdog journalism is so interesting to me, it seems to be the most lively type of journalism and most exciting in my mind.  However, I learned that it takes real work, stories like this do not just fall into journalist’s hands, and often a viable source doesn’t just walk into your office and leak information.  You must be searching people out, you must be putting forth the work and you must be willing to defend the people and hold those in power accountable.  As a citizen, I am grateful for the role watchdog journalism plays in society and hope that as I continue to learn more about journalism that I will be able to learn more about investigative reporting.

Something to Think About

In our Journalism class reading and discussion we talked about how the media, while not able to tell the public what to think, are often effective in telling the public what to think about.  This got me thinking about the responsibility and role journalists have in identifying what’s important in our community.  I decided I wanted to learn more about this role that journalists take on and how they go about identifying what’s important.

In my search to learn more about the agenda setting role of the media, I came across this piece: http://julie-stroebel.suite101.com/agendasetting-and-journalism-a126658.  I liked the way that this article separated agenda setting into four different types or ‘visions.’  I think that displayed different ways that journalists can use articles written as a way to bring items into the public eye.  I think knowing these four ways in which agenda setting can be used in journalism would be beneficial to both journalists and readers.  For journalists it is ways in which they can draw the public’s attention to what they feel is important and for readers it is to be aware that not all the news we read is necessarily important, it may have been written for a variety of reasons or motives.

Another piece that I was impressed by that was centered on agenda setting can be found here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJaq9-Qwehk.  While this particular clip touched mostly on mass media and political agenda setting, I think there are still points that I found helpful and applicable to journalists.  I think one of my favorite points they touched on was that often agenda setting is viewed in a negative light, when in reality journalists having an agenda and particular motives can be incredibly productive and helpful to society.  Journalists telling the people that they should be aware and concerned about a particular scandal inWashington or a particular policy can really help people be informed.

One thing that was brought to my attention, from the clip listed above, was the power civilians now have because of social media to keep the journalist in check from absolute agenda setting.  Social media has given rise to civilian journalism, if you would like to learn more about that click here: http://www.mobiledia.com/news/110080.html.  As displayed, social media cites like facebook and twitter have given people everywhere the opportunity to report on current events.  This has posed a check on journalists.  If journalists are refusing to report on a certain topic or truly have in mind that they have ultimate control on what they can get the public talking about, self reporting and civilian journalism can and will report on the things most pertinent to them and is another way to bring awareness throughout society.  While I think journalist’s ability to set the stage of topics people should be thinking about is overall beneficial, especially from the eyes of a journalist, I thought this was an interesting take and ability that social media has brought about.

Ultimately, the role journalists play in bringing to the attention of the public what they should be thinking about is very important.  It gives journalists a lot of power within the profession.  While I do not necessarily plan to pursue journalism as a career at this time, I hope that this information will help me to be an informed reader acknowledging that not all the articles I read in the paper or online are necessarily what is most important in our community or society.  I also hope as a reader, that journalists everywhere take this opportunity to bring the most important and interesting stories to the public’s eye as they often set what we are thinking about.  I think this is a huge power given to journalist and will be interesting to see the role that social media takes on throughout the coming years and whether or not this power remains as strong in the hands of the journalists.  Ultimately as long as journalists continue to use this power for good, it can be both rewarding to them and society.

Objectivity

Through my journalism class discussion and reading this past week, I have come to discover there is a journalism riddle: How does the writer separate them self from what is written?  The reality is you simply cannot, it’s like asking how you separate you from yourself.  Everyone on this earth has a different view and opinion, as Americans we value highly the concept of individuality, except for when it comes to journalism it seems.  As a civilian reader I want to read about what truthfully happened at an event, I want the facts and I don’t want to take the time to sit down and read a highly biased article, I want to know what really happened.  I think this is one of the challenges that journalists must face, it’s not a question of when, but how they will face it on a daily basis, and it occurs in every piece they do. 

Because this is a dilemma that each journalist is constantly facing, I decided I wanted to learn more about how people in the field view objectivity and how they believe it should be achieved.  In my search I came across this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJzRdMvBL1c.  I really liked how Alex Jones, the speaker in the clip, illustrated the concept of objectivity.  His words helped me to understand objectivity not so much of an abstract concept, but as a way of writing.  He seems to explain it as a useful tool for journalists to use to involve their views, but to do so wisely and appropriately.

Something that I found interesting in my search to better understand objectivity was how the definition and concept of objectivity has changed and evolved as journalism changes.  Here is an article by PBS: http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2011/07/rethinking-journalism-ethics-objectivity-in-the-age-of-social-media208.html.  It talks about how social networking and blogging has affected the journalism produced.  One thing that I think will improve my skills in journalism, from reading this particular article, is the need for journalists to always be joining in on the conversation, no matter the medium.  As a journalist it is exciting to know that we have the personal opportunity to join in the conversation and vary our level of objectivity depending on the medium.  While we must represent the profession and the company we work for, it’s liberating to know that there are venues in which our personal opinion and emotions can be included when done tastefully, after all opinion writing not only exists, but attracts readers.

The reality is that journalists have emotions and journalism can be an emotional field.  We know that journalism is selected as a career, at least partially, because of the passion within a person to get the full story.  Each piece that a journalist works on they spend time learning about, meeting people and then reporting on it.  It is hard to not get emotionally affected in some way or another when you spend that much time with a topic.  I found this clip to be enlightening from a reporter who had spent so much time reporting on the BP oil spill: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_trpCrDnSww.  In this particular clip I liked how he described what happened, but then mentioned how he even felt a little emotional as he watched the cap being put on successfully.  I think he illustrates what objectivity is and should be. Ultimately the emotions involved in an event are part of the news and should be reported.  Though it must be done in a way in which we recognize and account for the personal views that we have within ourselves entering a story.  From the journalism riddle there is no way to separate ourselves from ourselves, so we must each strive to embrace our views while still presenting the facts in an appropriate way.  I know that if I were to become a journalist, this is an area that I would need to work on and be aware of everyday on and off the job.  We as journalists are always evolving and learning more and we must remain professional and enter a story wanting to tell the truth which means entering a story being aware of our bias and making the adjustments as needed to show the truth.

Active but not Activist

The past few days something has really been weighing in my mind concerning the field of journalism.  This conundrum that has got me so ‘on the fence’ is whether or not it’s a good idea or acceptable for journalists to take part in their community through protests and other forms of participation.  In this post I don’t believe I will be able to come to a personal conclusion, but I plan to learn more about situations that deal with this dilemma and view the different sides.  My interest was sparked in this area through my journalism class reading and discussion on how a woman journalist from the New York Times was reprimanded for going out and participating in a “Freedom of Choice” demonstration.  This woman, Linda Greenhouse, did not call attention to herself in the protest and was just another woman in the crowd and [correction from previous published version of this post] was reprimanded because of it.  However, she ultimately went on to win the Pulitzer Prize for her coverage of the Supreme Court!

Greenhouse’s story got me interested in similar circumstances and caused me to wonder if journalists often get in trouble or lose their jobs due to their participation in society activist events. In my search, I came across an article on a similar situation of a journalist who joined the recent ‘Occupy Wall Street’ protest.  If you would like to read about this click here: http://thinkprogress.org/special/2011/10/28/356287/wync-radio-show-fires-journalist-for-taking-part-in-occupy-wall-street-protests/?mobile=nc.  This story differs a little from Greenhouse in that Caitlin Curran, the journalist, was planning on writing about her experience in the protest and planned on doing a piece.  However, she did not end up doing the piece because she was fired before doing so.  This is where her story becomes like Greenhouse’s, because she was fired because of her attendance and participation at the protest.

First, it is easy to see why editors and companies are concerned with this, as a company you would not want your readers to sense a bias in the pieces you produce and having a journalist who is active in the protest obviously presents that idea. Second, it is also easy to spot the journalists feelings on this topic.  Journalists live in this community too and are likely more educated on the current events and policies taking place.  They don’t want their civil rights limited because of their occupation.  Third, the readers are involved in this matter.  As a reader, you wouldn’t expect a journalist reporting on an event that they violently supported and took part in to correctly show both sides.  However, as we begin taking our journalist out of the action, as readers do we lose something as well?  As readers, do we just want uninvolved and emotionless people reporting from an ever bird’s eye view, or would we prefer to read about it from a person who was there in the streets marching.  Again it’s a hard topic to have a definite opinion on.

So what is one approach to handle this type of situation in the industry?  The NPR board decided that to take care of the problem presented to the companies and editors they would write up a personal ethics document, a handbook and employee code of conduct.  If you would like to read about that, click here: http://www.current.org/news/news1121simeone-npr.html.  I believe this was a good way to handle this.  While there is likely to be a debate on this matter for journalists everywhere, at least NPR took the initiative to draw the lines for their internal employees.  Then their employees are well aware of the standards set forth that will guide their actions, and if broken they will be held responsible.  I think this is a good compromise and a guiding light in the industry.  While it will still force journalists to possibly rethink acting on their activist views, it is fair that they know what is expected of them to keep their employment.

As stated and suspected in the beginning of this post, I still am unable to come to a definite conclusion on this topic.  However, I have decided through my readings that if we choose the occupation to be a journalist, we have to make sacrifices in our personal life.  In my reading I found this site: http://www.universalbyline.com/whatmakesagoodjournalist.php.
This is particularly helpful in explaining how journalists must conduct themselves and the sacrifices that must be made if you choose the occupation of a journalist.  While this may be a loss of participating in things that we believe or other ways, sacrifices will be necessary to keep our jobs or to avoid representing our companies in an unfavorable light.  However, we must take comfort that through sacrifice we earn the right to report on societal concerns and as long as we do so unbiased, we are able to contribute to our community by giving a voice to the voiceless.  The contributions that journalists are able to make to the world and community, if done well, can speak out more than attendance at a protest will and can make the personal sacrifices we must make well worth it.

Fabrication

Think back to when you were little, did you have an imaginary friend? If you did, did you ever blame something you had done wrong on your imaginary friend? This act probably got you in a lot of trouble!  As I was researching this creative time of our lives, I came across an internet publication from a question and answer website by a psychiatrist (two disclaimers, 1. I have not background checked this psychiatrist or website, mostly I’m including it to display a current event on how detailed stories children can make up. 2. Bare with me, while it seems I am being side tracked, this really does tie into my thoughts on journalism).  On this blog: http://doctorraj.com/children-fabricating-stories/  a parent asks if it’s normal that her daughter has fabricated an entire story about how, when, and where the family purchased a dog, right down to the breed of dog, and shared it with her whole elementary class.  The internet psychiatrist claims that this is completely normal for a young six year old to be so specific in their imaginary realities.  Thankfully, the majority of little kids grow out of the imaginary friend stage.   When we think of a professional adult doing something like this it seems silly, absurd and unlikely.  However, sometimes desperate journalists do something very similar, usually it’s attributing quotes and events to someone who is not real at all.  In the journalism world we call this fabrication.  Fabrication happens more often than we would like to think in the news.  It happens in a variety of forms, most of which include making up sources or misquoting sources.  It also happens when journalists make up entire events that did not happen, or when they fudge what really did happen.  I became interested in this from our discussion in our journalism class about people who had fabricated information and stories.  We talked about how it’s important to be transparent and to show where you got your information.

Fabricating stories is a huge deal and a complete breach in reliability and trust.  When an incident happens, no editor or citizen is happy about it.  One person that we’ve seen get especially worked up over fabricated stories is none other than TV legend and woman icon, Oprah.  We discussed in our class how upset Oprah was when she found out that, James Frey, the author of a book in her book club, A Million Little Pieces, had fabricated his events and stories.  I wanted to learn more about this and I came to find that not only had Oprah’s book club stumbled on to a fabricated memoir once, but twice.  You can read about her anger and disappointment here: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/23486842/ns/today-entertainment/t/oprah-duped-another-fabricated-memoir/#.T1LGsvFum8A.  I came to find that what Oprah and her company representatives were really upset about, was that the books had been classified as memoirs; they would’ve found the books as a great read, if they had been noted as fiction.  This helped me to realize that people are accepting and even interested in stories that are untrue, as long as they are classified as such.  This led me to better understand the role of a journalist, if you are looking to write stories, but not go to the work to find out credible sources and extensive work to find the truth, then possibly a career you are more suited for  is an author.  Journalists must be willing to truthfully discover and write the truth.

Upon our class reading and discussion I wanted to learn more about this topic and especially incidences when fabrication had occurred.  I quickly came across this story: http://diverseeducation.com/article/14594/ this story was pulled from the publication called the “Village Voice” because the freelance author had made up both the people he had quoted in the story, a college student and a government official.  What I liked most about this example was that it illustrated both fabrication and another topic we discussed in class, which mediums are most likely reliable sources.  The Village Voice, is a tabloid, which as all journalists and the majority of citizens know, that is one of the more unreliable sources.  However, just because it was published in a tabloid does not excuse the man from writing a completely fake story.  I was in awe to read about this incident because it’s hard for me to comprehend a professional simply making up a story and publishing it as truth.