Critical Thinking - J-School students and industry vets tackle the tough questions
Posted: 2/1/2011 | By:
Q: WikiLeaks’ disclosures from secret government documents, cell phone-captured event videos posted immediately to YouTube, and rapid-fire texting and twittering of both personal opinions and on-the-spot observations have all contributed to a blurring of the lines between what is private and what is subject matter for public discourse, and what is news and what is not.
People expect information quickly, if not immediately, leaving less time for analysis of material that is published. In some cases, anything seems to be fair game — from publishing private conversations to tweeting the latest unconfirmed rumor. In the current climate of “information overload,” how do journalists continue to protect the very nature of their profession, which is to investigate an issue thoroughly and report the facts accurately?
Laura J. Nelson
21, junior at Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism at the University of Southern California. Nelson will be a metro intern at The Boston Globe this summer and previously has worked for the St. Petersburg (Fla.) Times and the Daily News in Los Angeles.
A:Since I first began exploring journalism, I’ve felt the powerful tug of storytelling. And as everything from the job market to the definition of “journalist” shifts under our feet, I find that stability of purpose more and more comforting. No matter what changes, I know: We still will be storytellers.
By adding value to this glut of raw information without losing our ethics or purpose, by striving to become indispensable analysts and storytellers, we have a better shot at protecting the tenets of the profession we love.
The opening of the information floodgates doesn’t have to be scary. Even in the fever-pitch race to be first, the familiar questions are still important: What does this mean? Why does this matter? What happens next?
Journalists who survive this shake-up will have a hybrid outlook. They’ll have the ethics, caution, and influence of the traditional news media blended with the speed, flexibility, and interactivity of the digital journalist.
Consumers facing a mountain of raw information — or diplomatic cables — would benefit from verification, trend interpretation, and thoughtful analysis. The same goes for thoroughness, accuracy, and accountability. Being right is now even more important than being first.
And more than ever, there is a place for dedicated, delicate storytelling. Whether a gripping tale of love, loss and triumph, or a graphic analyzing thousands of public records, a good story rarely is pounded out within seconds in 140 characters or less.
That said, stories should be shared over Twitter and open for discussion in every way. Journalists should be approachable and accountable, engaging audiences on a variety of platforms — and, of course, telling stories.
Angie Drobnic Holan
38, reporter and researcher, PolitiFact and the St. Petersburg (Fla.) Times
Holan covers political campaigns, taxes, health care, and the federal budget for Florida’s largest daily.
She can be reached at holan@politifact.com.
A:People may not literally overload with information, with alarms sounding and smoke coming out of their ears, but it certainly feels real enough. There are more news reports and data releases than any one person can handle in a given day, and that’s where our favorite media outlets come in. We rely on them to manage information for us, telling us what’s important and deserving of our attention. This has always gone on, but in the Internet age, it’s becoming even more vital. Readers who feel like they’re not getting what they need from a news organization will move on quickly to another one.
Meanwhile, breaking news has changed radically. Information spreads so fast now that we often don’t know or can’t remember which media outlet got it “first.” We journalists are competitive, so who gets it first will always matter to us. But if we’re first but wrong, we’ve taken a major hit to our credibility.
The more common problem, though, is breaking news too often is presented with no context or explanation, sometimes in reports filed hours or even days later. Readers want to know how things fit into the bigger picture. Thanks to the Web, it’s easier than ever to experiment with new ways of presenting news. At PolitiFact, the website where I work as a reporter, we’ve taken traditional fact-checking journalism and used it to create a database-driven archive, and we use a Truth-O-Meter to indicate quickly to readers the conclusions we’ve reached through our reporting.
As journalists, we need to experiment with new story forms that give readers the day’s news, but also show the greater meaning.
People expect information quickly, if not immediately, leaving less time for analysis of material that is published. In some cases, anything seems to be fair game — from publishing private conversations to tweeting the latest unconfirmed rumor. In the current climate of “information overload,” how do journalists continue to protect the very nature of their profession, which is to investigate an issue thoroughly and report the facts accurately?
Laura J. Nelson
21, junior at Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism at the University of Southern California. Nelson will be a metro intern at The Boston Globe this summer and previously has worked for the St. Petersburg (Fla.) Times and the Daily News in Los Angeles.
A:Since I first began exploring journalism, I’ve felt the powerful tug of storytelling. And as everything from the job market to the definition of “journalist” shifts under our feet, I find that stability of purpose more and more comforting. No matter what changes, I know: We still will be storytellers.
By adding value to this glut of raw information without losing our ethics or purpose, by striving to become indispensable analysts and storytellers, we have a better shot at protecting the tenets of the profession we love.
The opening of the information floodgates doesn’t have to be scary. Even in the fever-pitch race to be first, the familiar questions are still important: What does this mean? Why does this matter? What happens next?
Journalists who survive this shake-up will have a hybrid outlook. They’ll have the ethics, caution, and influence of the traditional news media blended with the speed, flexibility, and interactivity of the digital journalist.
Consumers facing a mountain of raw information — or diplomatic cables — would benefit from verification, trend interpretation, and thoughtful analysis. The same goes for thoroughness, accuracy, and accountability. Being right is now even more important than being first.
And more than ever, there is a place for dedicated, delicate storytelling. Whether a gripping tale of love, loss and triumph, or a graphic analyzing thousands of public records, a good story rarely is pounded out within seconds in 140 characters or less.
That said, stories should be shared over Twitter and open for discussion in every way. Journalists should be approachable and accountable, engaging audiences on a variety of platforms — and, of course, telling stories.
Angie Drobnic Holan
38, reporter and researcher, PolitiFact and the St. Petersburg (Fla.) Times
Holan covers political campaigns, taxes, health care, and the federal budget for Florida’s largest daily.
She can be reached at holan@politifact.com.
A:People may not literally overload with information, with alarms sounding and smoke coming out of their ears, but it certainly feels real enough. There are more news reports and data releases than any one person can handle in a given day, and that’s where our favorite media outlets come in. We rely on them to manage information for us, telling us what’s important and deserving of our attention. This has always gone on, but in the Internet age, it’s becoming even more vital. Readers who feel like they’re not getting what they need from a news organization will move on quickly to another one.
Meanwhile, breaking news has changed radically. Information spreads so fast now that we often don’t know or can’t remember which media outlet got it “first.” We journalists are competitive, so who gets it first will always matter to us. But if we’re first but wrong, we’ve taken a major hit to our credibility.
The more common problem, though, is breaking news too often is presented with no context or explanation, sometimes in reports filed hours or even days later. Readers want to know how things fit into the bigger picture. Thanks to the Web, it’s easier than ever to experiment with new ways of presenting news. At PolitiFact, the website where I work as a reporter, we’ve taken traditional fact-checking journalism and used it to create a database-driven archive, and we use a Truth-O-Meter to indicate quickly to readers the conclusions we’ve reached through our reporting.
As journalists, we need to experiment with new story forms that give readers the day’s news, but also show the greater meaning.