What is journalism?

We've read hundreds of pages this semester on journalism — its history, its successes, its failures and its future. As communicators and as citizens, it is essential that we understand and appreciate this profession and the rights and responsibilities it carries like no other thanks to the First Amendment.

After all the readings and discussions over the semester, I've found little nuggets here and there that I know I will take from the class well into the future. Perhaps one sentence that I think best describes journalism appears early in The Elements of Journalism by Kovach and Rosenstiel. The purpose of journalism, they wrote, "is defined not by technology, nor by journalists or the techniques they employ, but by something more basic: the function news plays in the lives of people."

As naive as it may sound to some or as pretentious as it may sound to others, I think journalism truly is a unique profession. It is a way to serve our communities and our society as a whole that no other profession, industry, business or whatever term one wants to use can. It helps create an informed citizenry so our democracy can function properly. It shines a light on injustices and wrongdoing as well as on good deeds and generosity. It can investigate and educate. It can be a voice on our behalf when we think no one hears us.

Certainly it is not without its problems. Its highs and lows over the decades are documented. It has been used by some as a tool to further an agenda and by others as a cover to engage in unethical or illegal practices. And now it faces another era of change as it adapts to technologies that are shaping it in ways we may not be able to foresee fully.

If as news organizations transform structurally and philosophically, they keep in mind Kovach and Rosenstiel's words — that journalists' ultimate loyalty is to their readers and viewers, and that the role journalism can play in their lives should be its guiding principle — then the decisions they make will be the right ones, even if it takes a while for them to succeed.

The Google Effect, Part 1

As we talked in class tonight about "push" and "pull" media, and how people increasingly are retaining less information because they know they can find whatever they need online, I was reminded of a New York Times opinion piece that I read, heartily agreed with and bookmarked a few months ago titled "Faking Cultural Literacy." In it, journalist Karl Greenfeld laments that the technology that puts the world at our fingertips also can keep us from learning much at all. Information is pushed into our lives non-stop — so much information, so quickly, that it physically is impossible to absorb, and eventually we don't even try:

It’s never been so easy to pretend to know so much without actually knowing anything. We pick topical, relevant bits from Facebook, Twitter or emailed news alerts, and then regurgitate them. Instead of watching “Mad Men” or the Super Bowl or the Oscars or a presidential debate, you can simply scroll through someone else’s live-tweeting of it, or read the recaps the next day. Our cultural canon is becoming determined by whatever gets the most clicks. ... What matters to us, awash in petabytes of data, is not necessarily having actually consumed this content firsthand but simply knowing that it exists — and having a position on it, being able to engage in the chatter about it. We come perilously close to performing a pastiche of knowledgeability that is really a new model of know-nothingness.

(LOVE that last sentence.)

Greenfeld also readily admits to being guilty as charged, and surmises that "those of us in the business of gathering, dispensing and otherwise trafficking in information may be among the worst offenders." He is right, sadly. We as communicators often are expected by our readers, viewers, bosses, CEOs or whomever to know something about pretty much everything, as unrealistic an expectation as that is. The pressure to break a news story before anyone else or keep up with the latest social media statistics for our PR clients is immense, and we fear overlooking that one bit of information that could be the game changer. Yet how can we possibly keep up with the overflow in our inboxes and Twitter feeds? We can't, really, so we skim, save and hope we remember what we need when we need it.

In The Elements of Journalism, Kovach and Rosenstiel acknowledge the pressure that the 24/7 news cycle puts on journalists, but say the stakes are too high to fake it. "The pursuit of truth is a process that requires an intellectual discipline and vigilance," they wrote in Chapter 2. "And the need for this is greater, not lesser, in the new century because the likelihood of untruth has become so much greater."

Now if you'll excuse me, I DVR'd "Chicago Fire" last night, and yes, I'm going to fast-forward through the commercials (sorry advertisers).