Verification

No one can argue against the importance of verification in journalism. Verification is how stories are corroborated. Verification is how we find the truth. Oftentimes sources have their own agenda. With verification, journalists can weed out the misinformation. Bill Kovach & Tom Rosenstiel state in their book Elements of Journalism that verification is the "beating heart of credible journalism in the public interest." There are several threats to verification in the journalism industry. Two of which are the pressure to publish news immediately (while it's still news) and the pressure to publish news that is already "out there." Both of these threats go directly against verification. One example of a verification dilemma could be when journalists encounter news of a story from a source that wants to be kept anonymous. This story may be hot news of a scandal in the White House. The source says you cannot use his name with the story. However, there are no other people that can corroborate what he is saying. What do you do? Granted, journalists are encouraged to verify all of their sources before publishing. This may mean that you can't run the story. Doesn't the public have a right to know what is going on? Should you simply run the story without any source? Journalists need to cover their bases. What if the source has a separate agenda other than the truth? What if he is trying to sabotage a government official and you help him do it? Journalism can be a sticky situation when it comes down to verification. My conclusion is better safe than sorry.

The Profession

The profession or the priesthood of journalists? In the Mind of a Journalist, Jim Willis writes "Journalists see journalism as a kind of professional priesthood in which they, much like the clergy or even police officers, surrender to the higher calling of serving others." I think the term priesthood is far too spiritual of a term to use for journalists. Priesthood denotes serving others in behalf of God. It denotes authority. Journalists are not inextricably linked to holiness where they are called on by a higher source to serve others. Journalism is a career. It is a job. Journalists have a duty to report news, to be the fourth estate providing checks and balances, to serve their audience. They do not act in behalf of God. Journalists' duty is not a sacred duty, it is simply an important duty. I can understand how people want to distinguish their careers as something they are not. Perhaps it provides them with something to talk about at the bar. Instead of speaking of journalists' priesthood duty, let's focus on their professional duty. Willis states further, "The media provides counterbalances and checks on the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of American government." Journalists allow us to stay close to what each of the branches are doing. Spreading news prevents any branch from becoming too powerful. Through the news, citizens can unite together easier. People can know what is going on and incite change where needed. Journalists' duty to report the news should not be taken likely. However, to say there is a priesthood of journalists would be overreaching.

Pew Media Study

Despite popular opinion that Americans get most of their news from the television, Pew Research Center recently released research findings that suggest we should not discount local newspapers, Web sites, and even word of mouth as news mediums.

Pew's media study found that television used primarily to get information about the weather, traffic, and breaking news. Newspapers and their Web sites were used for getting information on a wide variety of other topics from local government updates to crime reports. The study also found that word of mouth (through text messages/twitter posts) is the second most common means of news distribution on the local level.

These findings were a compilation of over 2,000 adults that were surveyed.

I would agree with the findings of this study. If I were asked where I got most news from, initially I would think from the television. However, upon closer observation, I would say that word of mouth is one of my bigger news mediums. I often here people talking about "breaking news" in my classes. I inquire about what they are discussing because I am unaware of the news. After class, I often research the topic further on the Internet. I would imagine I am not the only one that uses this same method of discovering news.

Journalism and Loyalty

A conflict of interest can often lead to detrimental consequences for those involved. For instance, in the legal profession you would not have the same attorney represent the plaintiff and the defendant. There would clearly be a conflict of interest. The attorney would not be able to unbiasedly represent either client. The attorney may also be tempted to push an agreement through that would have the biggest payout for his firm. Luckily in the legal profession, the duty of loyalty to the client prohibits an attorney from representing any other party whose interests conflict with those of a current client. Conflicts of interest cannot always be avoided. In journalism, situations can arise which cause a conflict of interest. Journalists have a loyalty to their company who employs them, as well as, a loyalty to citizens. For example, if you work for ABC News and you discover a disheartening story about Disney should you refrain from covering it because Disney owns your news organization? The journalism industry would say no, you should report the story. Your first loyalty is to your audience. Almost all news organizations have a code of ethics which includes the importance of delivering truth to the audience. This can be hard if you feel your job is at stake. As journalists we have to make a commitment that no matter whether we lose our job or not, we will pursue the truth and deliver it. Journalists can only operate if people trust what they write. Once you lose your credibility, it is tough to regain. Each journalist's actions reflect on the newspaper as a whole.

Truth & Journalism

"Journalism's first obligation is to the truth," says Bill Kovach and Tom Rosentiel in their book Elements of Journalism. However, even in my short life, I have seen truth being interpreted differently. What does truth even mean? Patty Calhoun, the editor of the alternative weekly paper Westword, says, "you cannot be objective because you're going in with certain biases." I see the world differently than Adolf Hitler would or Saddam Hussein. What I see as fundamental truths, others may not. I believe the underlying problem is how liberally we use the word truth. Truth should not be subjective. Lynn A. Mickelson, a LDS religious leader, said in an address to the world-wide church, "Truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come." Truth should be unchanging. For example, the law of gravity is a truth. No matter how or when you test this truth, the result is the same. What goes up, must come down unless acted on by another force.

Some may use news and truth interchangeably. Even Walter Lippmann did so at one point. However, later he wrote in his book Public Opinion, "News and truth are not the same thing.... The function of news is to signalize an event, or make people aware of it. The function of truth is to bring to light the hidden facts, to set them into relation with each other, and make a picture of reality upon which men can act." We must not forget this distinction. To obtain truth, we must strive to throw out all preconceived notions. We must compensate for our subjectively in our writing. We must explore all points of view. Only then may we obtain the facts and find the truth that lies beneath it.

The Future of News

I find it difficult to make a prediction for the future regarding almost any topic. There are so many variables out there that it seems silly to even try. If we just consider the development of transportation and communication during the last 50 years, we have made huge bounds in technological advances. I feel like I am one of the people that thinks inside the box. I am fortunate to be alive during a time where the world has become such a small place. This facilitates even more advances in any and every area you can think of.

With regards to the news, I believe we will continue to see more digital news. I could see people discontinue reading hard copies of newspapers resulting in newspaper companies going out of business. I believe that laptops will phase out of popularity and people will begin carrying Ipad size tablets which will contain their whole life. People will no longer want to be bogged down by a traditional newspaper when they can access anything they want through their touchpad.

I believe this will cause more and more people to become narrow-minded and less-educated on world events. People will only search out news that already interests them and reenforces their views. People will not be subjected to news that they don't feel is applicable to them.

I imagine social skills will also deteriorate as a result of technological advances. I could see people mainly communicating electronically. It is fast and effective. People can also think about what they want to say beforehand.

On a religious note, I think satan will gain a strong hold on technology and use it against us. I think we are close to reaching a point that we no longer need technological advances in communication. Instead, we need people thinking up ways to be more environmentally conscious (inexpensive energy-efficient cars). More than ever, we need people to figure out better ways to filter out the filth in our lives.

Only time will tell what the future holds in news. I just hope we progress as a people and remembers what's important in life.

What is Journalism?

When faced with this question my mind is swept away into stories of "breaking news" captions of newspapers I've read, television broadcasts I've watched, and radio stations I've heard. To me, journalism is the press. As defined by Dictionary.com, the press is the "printed publications collectively." Journalists are those who write for the press. I understand that some are of the opinion that anyone can be a journalist, especially these days when creating a blog is only a few clicks away. I would have to agree with that opinion, but I must emphasize the word can. If an individual publishes news through their blog or other means, I would consider them a journalist. To be considered news, the information published needs to be pertinent to a large number of people. It would be hard for me to define my opinion of how big that group needs to be. If I were to delve deeper into defining more words I do believe I would lose the reader. When I read about the purpose of journalism from "The Elements of Journalism" by Bill Kovach & Tom Rosenstiel I find that it is intended to "provide cititizens with the information they need to be free and self-governing." That does not seem like the easiest task to do. This is precisely why anyone has the capability of being a journalist, but most of us are not.

Considering today is September 11, my mind is already turned towards the news and journalism. I still remember where I was when I heard "the news" of the airplanes crashing into the World Trade Center. I'm sure everyone does. Like the day Pearl Harbor was attacked, 9/11 will forever be "a date which will live in infamy." My heart goes out to all Americans who were directly affected by this tragic act. I am not talking to those Americans who are disgruntled by the fact that they no longer can get through the security lines as fast at the airports. I am talking to those people who lost their husbands, wives, mothers and fathers, kids and grandkids. To them I give my deepest condolences. For them I will continue to pray every year on this day.