The Fourth Estate: From Traditional to Digital Journalism
In 2008, the Internet passed newspapers as a source of news for Americans. Television remains atop that heap, but only when the population is all Americans. When the population of interest is age 18-29, the Internet is the primary source of news (Internet). This change in the fourth estate may very well change the American democracy at its very core, for without the press, democracy is impossible (Carlyle). With those stakes, this shift can hardly be ignored. The shift can be broadly termed the change from print to digital. The crucial components of news journalism are its focus, ethics, and accuracy. Examining these points will lead to a better understanding of how the shift of news to the internet may affect the world.
The focus of news, in this context is what stories that news outlet deigns cover. Orwell outlined the concept extraordinarily well in his novel 1984; the concept is that of an “unperson”. An “unperson” is someone who has been simply removed from history, for all practical purposes, they never existed (Orwell). If an event is not covered by reporters and distributed, a similar effect occurs- the event never happens. As news organizations have finite resources and space, they cannot cover all stories, so some news is not distributed. Depending on who it is that pays for the news, the focus shifts correspondingly. Currently, newspapers charge significant amounts for content, in the form of subscription fees, as opposed to relying solely on advertising (Conde). A proposal from the City University of New York Graduate School of Journalism makes a case for hyperlocal blogs as the news of the future (Hyperlocal). The hyperlocal blog would cover only local events, this would shortchange the public information function of journalism (Kovach, Rosenstiel). Without national and international news, as provided by the current model of news, citizens are sorely uninformed. The focus of digital news is, in CUNY’s scenario, shifting to a local standpoint. This shift makes a significant contrast with traditional news.
The ethics of news reporting is concerned primarily with conflicts of interest (SPJ). In traditional journalism, the journalist is identified by name, has received training about ethical journalism, and is monitored by their employer. The Internet guarantees none of these things (Rigby). While there are other aspects of ethical journalism, there are no ways to enforce or even discover them without some sort of identifier of the author. In regards to another aspect of conflicting interests, the Society of Professional Journalists says that journalists are to avoid hybrids of news and advertising absolutely (SPJ). There are reports of illegal paid for “news” articles which are actually advertisements; this genre of writing is commonly called the “advertorial” or “promotional news” (Erjavec). The contrast here is that without identification of an author, there is no fear of posting blatantly false information online in the guise of news.
The journalistic concept of ethics is closely related to that of accuracy. The Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics and the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism agree that an extremely important obligation of the journalist is to the truth; very much akin to Sgt. Friday’s, “All we want are the facts” (Mikkelson). Without ethical practices, the journalistic commitment to accuracy dissolves quickly, as shown by Shirley Sherrod’s edited and misinterpreted speech. Andrew Breitbart, one of these new, digital, journalists, released a heavily edited cut of Sherrod’s comments, with the accusation that she was a racist(Blood; Breitbart). Had a traditional journalist been contacted by an anonymous source and given an edited video, if he had the commitment to the truth that journalists base their profession on, he would have attempted to verify that information. No such attempt was made (Boone, Garner). This sharp contrast with a traditional journalist’s approach, in this case presented by Bill O’Reilly. He apologized after it was clear that the video was incomplete, saying that he, “should have done his homework” (Stolberg et. al.). Such a difference in approach to journalism could prove extremely potent, if lax fact-checking become standard, stories like the Sherrod controversy could become more common.
Contrasting traditional and digital journalism in theory and in practice shows that while there are effective, ethical, digital journalists, there are also rouges. The inherent anonymity afforded by the Internet could, in the future, allow for even less oversight of those who report the news. Without identifiers, the Sherrod controversy might have been amplified further, and the question of who will watch the watchers becomes startlingly relevant. Because of its crucial importance to the American system of government, the evolution of the news media is a worthy topic of discussion (Carlyle). The Internet as a source of news continues to grow in prominence, especially among the youngest Americans, therefore digital journalism must rise correspondingly (Internet). The news companies must realign with their audience; this means digital news will continue to rise, barring a shift in how their audiences prefer news. In order to survive, the Fourth Estate must change, but in order to remain the Fourth Estate, in will need to keep its guidelines which made it what it is today. Examining the differences between traditional and digital news shows where both lack, and demonstrates that the solution is likely a middle path. Digital journalism, to continue to inform the public, should broaden its focus to include national and international stories, in order to fill the gap left by declining traditional sources. Digital journalism, in short, must mature, much as print journalism evolved through the yellow journalism period. If it does so, and adopts the ethical guidelines that traditional journalism did, the Fourth Estate will continue to be more important than all (Carlyle).
No comments:
Post a Comment