Posted on 05/09/2004 9:00:58 AM PDT by Vision
The media industry has been infested by the rise of pseudo-journalists who go against journalism's long tradition to serve the public with accurate information, Los Angeles Times Editor John S. Carroll told a packed room in the Gerlinger Lounge on Thursday. Carroll delivered the annual Ruhl Lecture, titled "The Wolf in Reporter's Clothing: The Rise of Pseudo-Journalism in America." The lecture was sponsored by the School of Journalism and Communication.
"All over the country there are offices that look like newsrooms and there are people in those offices that look for all the world just like journalists, but they are not practicing journalism," he said. "They regard the audience with a cold cynicism. They are practicing something I call a pseudo-journalism, and they view their audience as something to be manipulated."
In a scathing critique of Fox News and some talk show hosts, such as Bill O'Reilly, Carroll said they were a "different breed of journalists" who misled their audience while claiming to inform them. He said they did not fit into the long legacy of journalists who got their facts right and respected and cared for their audiences.
Carroll cited a study released last year that showed Americans had three main misconceptions about Iraq: That weapons of mass destruction had been found, a connection between al-Qaeda and Iraq had been demonstrated and that the world approved of U.S intervention in Iraq. He said 80 percent of people who primarily got their news from Fox believed at least one of the misconceptions. He said the figure was more than 57 percentage points higher than people who get their news from public news broadcasting.
"How in the world could Fox have left its listeners so deeply in the dark?" Carroll asked.
He added that a difference exists between journalism and propaganda.
As he addressed some of the hard hits journalism has taken in the field of ethics, Carroll noted that anyone could be a journalist because, unlike other fields, journalism had no qualification tests, boards to censure misconduct or a universally accepted set of standards.
However, Carroll said a great depth of feeling remains on the importance of ethics that is centered around newspapers' sense of responsibilities to their readers.
"I've learned that these ethics are deeply believed in even though in some places they are not even written down," he said. When ethical guidelines are ignored, their proponents respond with 'tribal ferocity,'" he added.
"If you stray badly from these rules, you will pay dearly," he said.
He said while much media has ended up "in the gutter," the L.A. Times has a different philosophy and was dedicated to taking the "high road."
"I do think that a lot of newspaper people have made a lot of strategic mistakes," he said. "They cut back space on things people really need to know."
Carroll, whose career as a journalist spans 40 years, joined the L.A. Times in 2000, according to the paper's Web site. Under his leadership, the paper earned five Pulitzer Prizes this year.
Tim Gleason, dean of the SOJC, said Carroll is a "journalist's journalist."
"As an editor he cares deeply about the integrity of the profession and he believes that news, real news is the heart and soul of the business of journalism," Gleason said as he introduced Carroll.
University graduate student Mose Mosely had similar sentiments. He said he admired Carroll not only for his vast experience around the country, but also for his consistent commitment to his ideals.
"The depth of his integrity is very impressive," Mosely said.
Bobbie Willis, a staff writer for the Eugene Weekly, said she felt Carroll brought up some relevant issues in today's media environment.
"It really made me take a look at my career as a journalist," she said.
Willis said she understood Carroll's concerns about the state of journalism nationally, but added that many of the journalists she has encountered were very committed to accurate and ethical reporting.
Carroll had a few words of advise for student journalists; he told them to pick their boss carefully.
"Don't be lured by the money or the big name of the employer," he said, adding that journalists should not allow their integrity to be compromised by unscrupulous employers.
"Don't be a piano player in a whorehouse," he said.
Newspapers See Danger in Text Messaging ^
The elites are getting busy , only they can certify that the NEWS is true!!!
My first thought was the lamestream in the DNC.
The local Gannett rag cycles editorials from other papers. I usually can pick out the LAT's before I get to the bottom "From the LAT".
Another "Do as I say, not as I do". He must really be ticked off not being able to have torpedoed Schwarzeneggar, or make an appreciable dent in Bush.
What was the LAT's (and Mr. Carroll's) position of sexually abusive predators in the White House a few years back?
Carroll is desparately trying to remain relevant after the new media (aka pseudo-journalists) have given more truthful,
accurate and useful information and news in its short existence than Carroll has over his career.
He's green with envy and deeply saddened at the loss of lamestream power.
The situation that we have now is that newspapers claim they are "objective" when they are just as rabid, in fact some of them froth at the mouth at the mention of President Bush.
Another situation which has evolved during the past 40 to 60 years, is that the journalist (although holding a 4 year college degree) have escaped being educated. It is as if they actually tried not to learn anything. As an example, recall the questions that the correspondents asked General Schwartzkopf at his briefings. They were less than infantile, they showed no grasp of the subject materials. Now, it is people of this caliber which try to present their view point to us in today's newspapers.
Good.
I get my news from a variety of sources including NPR, FreeRepublic and even the Lamestream media. To suggest "public news broadcasting" has a monopoly on the "truth" is odious.
The only way they can win is to frame the argument that the conservative media is guilty of hate crimes, or somehow paint them as violating ethics of journalism as THEY define it.
The serious part is that lib media is seriously at war with America and our constitutional system. They are seeking to tear down the freedoms, the economy, the opposition party by whatever means necessary to accomplish their ends...control.
Control of the intellectual elites. They know what is best for us. They know how our money is best to be spent. They know what we should drive, where we should go. They presume to know how best to conduct foreign affairs. They presume to know best how to conduct spy work by making all our actions and intents open to our enemies. We are too stupid to know how to live. And if we presume to do so, we should be locked up in prison.
We have allowed the liberals to steal a march on us and dictate the terms of the debate, to define the meaning of the terms. It is high time to assert the voice of logic, reason and conservative values in this country and deal with zero tolerance any attempt to silence that voice.
This is my rant for today. Imperfectly expressed as it is, I still feel deeply that we are in a serious civil war, bloodless perhaps, but only temporarily so.
As a trained journalist, I'm thrilled to see the old media get smacked around for being so "old news."
The last time I actually looked a traditional newspaper (local rag) almost every article I read was informationally out of date for me - anywhere from 24 to 36 hours old! (Can you tell I'm an info junkie!) This includes sports and national news. It was amazing to see the "Age" of the articles, and the funny thing is that some of the news was "repackaged" to reflect the paper's agenda. Amazing.
Once the print media realizes that they cannot keep up in the changing news cycles - why print an article about an event that happened 20 hours ago when everyone else has covered it - when you don't do the one thing that seperates the print media from the internet and television media - better in-depth reporting. However, most print journalists are not equipted to do this kind of reporting any more. Most are adept at regurgutating a press release from a PR or adverting service.
What will be needed is a change of the business model - where the papers (I don't have any experience in television, so I can't comment) do a different niche of reporting, or they stagnate and die. Most will stagnate and die. Only a few will have the vision to evolve to survive.
What I find now is that the new kids who are going into it - and being taught by the old librals who are entrenched in the j-schools are being met with resistance from these more conservative kids who, tho willing to work their ways up the feeding chain, aren't willing to espouse anything but what they are being taught - namely, regurgitate what's already been written. Those who are bucking the trade are writing for the new media, while the old reporters are "dying" off.
The few that are holding on for dear life are turning off the kids, who know that those who are hanging on by a thread, are espousing their own agenda.
(I would also get a mound of newspapers, but I am also a "compassionate conservative": someone who hates wasting paper, so I read my news online (to keep the paper waste down.) tee hee!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.