Questions: In journalism, what does "the truth" mean? Is it the same as "the facts"? More generally, is it possible to achieve truth in journalism? Why or why not? How can journalists pursue the truth more conscientiously?
Thursday, September 11, 2008
What is Truth and How Can Journalists Pursue It?
In The Elements of Journalism, Kovach and Rosenstiel contemplate the meaning of truth in journalism. Truth, they write, is the first principle of journalism, but it is also the most confusing. Based on their discussion (see Chapter 2), consider the nature of truth and the issues journalists face in seeking it. Then write a short post addressing major parts of the following questions:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Truth seems to be very elusive, so much so that journalists are striving to find that which comes closest to it. Journalist Carl Bernstein has described this as reporter’s striving to provide “the best obtainable version of the truth” (EOJ, 43). Truth, as I take it from this chapter, is constructed of layers upon layers of findings that come together to form a comprehensive and coherent story. Accuracy, or facts, are the building blocks, the foundation, of any attempt to find truth. However, truth may not even exist as we are all subjective individuals. I don’t believe it is possible to achieve truth in journalism or anywhere else for that matter. “The only truth is that there is no truth” and all we can do is to try and discover as much information and fact as possible to try and piece together as much of the puzzle as we can and then find what truth means to us individually.
S.Johnson
According to Kovach and Rosenstiel, journalistic truth is an ongoing process that begins with accurately collected facts and continues when new information is learned and adds to the truth of the story. It is not sufficeint to accept facts and then go right into interpretation of them because it is the credibility and conveyance of the facts themselves which are important to the reader. Another aspect of journalism that muddys truth is its tendency to be "reactive and practical by nature" (41), rather than deeply contemplative, because their job is to cover breaking events. However, it is through the multiple stages of uncovering truth every day on a news story that allows this reactionary nature to reveal truth to the audience. I agree that much of the news today is taken up by speculation, hearsay, and interpretation of various irrelevant stories that are covered to appease commercial interests. There is a need for facts to be analyzed critically and be allowed to change the way people perceive a certain news story, and on a different level the world in general. It is also the readers job to disseminate between truth and fallacy, but it must be made easier by reforming news media.
Patrick K.
With advanced technology, which “has only speeded up the process, aiding truth and falsehood alike,” the principle of journalistic truth has only increased in importance (48). Journalists now must focus greater attention towards reaching a journalistic truth, while at the same time limiting their personal biases in order for the public to have the best information at hand. The concept of journalistic truth is not simply limited to listing the facts, because the facts without surrounding context can prove to be useless, or even harmful, to citizens. But at the same time, journalists must strive to write what they know as the truth, both the facts and surrounding context, in an unbiased manner, in order for citizens to benefit more successfully from the news. Therefore, journalists roles in society have become not only more important, but more complicated, as “the need for truth is greater, not lesser, in the new century, for the likelihood of untruth has become so much more possible” (49).
In addition, it seems almost impossible to reach ultimate truth in journalism, though ultimate truth is desirable. For example, the way a journalist views an event will vary from journalist to journalist – so while one reporter may feel they are conveying an event truthfully and in an unbiased manner, another journalist views the same event differently therefore believes the first journalist is incorrect in their view. Therefore, due to difference in opinions, varying views, and also personal biases, each person’s view on journalistic truth varies and therefore one definition cannot generalize all views.
Elizabeth Kubik
Truth, as I understand, can be categorized into two major distinct entities. Objective, or unbiased, can be seen as the “the facts” that can be proven to be true without a shred of doubt. Subjective, on the other hand, is completely arbitrary and is up to the discretion of the reader whether to accept or question “the facts” given. For journalists, in order to arrive to truth in a subjective manner, Kovach and Rosenstiel makes it clear to understand truth as an ongoing process “that begins with the first story and builds over time” (43). By keeping this process in mind, journalists can build upon each others stories in order to reach an accurate, “practical or functional form of truth” (42). This procedure allows journalists to become more conscious of “the facts” for us, as citizens, to rely on and accept as truth. But even with this process, it would be naïve and even foolish to overlook the fact that biased opinions, in some form or fashion, can still be embedded within the story and is merit for disapproval.
J. Reed
The truth in journalism definitely is different then how a person would tell the truth to another person. The book states that "they develop procedures and process to arrive at what might be called "fictional truth"(42). What they are saying is that when a journalist or reporter is telling of the events that have occurred either at an accident or a news conference, the way in which they describe that event may not actually have happened but more of what could grab the attention of the reader. The facts that many people assume gives you truth is merely giving a false assumption of what did occur or is going to occur. In 1947 the Hutchins Commission spent years coming up with an outline that looked down on producing facts about minorities that created stereotypes about that certain ethnicities. The truth and journalism, in my opinion from reading the chapter, will always have a certain elaboration to the reporters story just because the reporter is competing with other reporters to get their stories on the paper as well as a cover story, so many of them will try and spice up their stories and columns a bit. Reporters I think are doing the best they can to report the truth, however when the readers are wanting more of a Hollywood drama to come out of what they read in the paper it is hard for a reporter not to elaborate on his or her story.
Jon Bell
Truth is objective; humans are not. This simple idea summarizes the incessant public distrust of the media that has become increasingly troublesome to journalists in contemporary times. The book claims that it is easy to report the score of a football game, but trying to explain why a team won or lost instantly becomes a myriad of second guesses and individual judgment. A professor for another class also submits that true objectivity in reporting is impossible: a reporter who spends two hours interviewing someone for a story is often given a 90-second slot in which to present everything he’s garnered from those two hours. Judgment is critical in deciding what he must report and what is unimportant.
Kovach and Rosenstiel discuss the idea of “functional truth,” which serves its purpose but it always subject to change, such as declaring a defendant guilty or teaching students the laws of physics (42). These may not be truth at all, but they allow society to function and attempt to progress. Perhaps this is the best we can hope for. Journalists may not be able to report the “truth” in a purely objective fashion, but it is important for them to recognize their limitations and strive to leave personal judgments out of major news stories in order to disseminate information as accurately as possible.
last post was M Kadin
There is no way at this date of world history in America as an independent press. I believe the business of the Journalist is to destroy the truth, Freedom of the press is one of the sacred parts of modern Demoncracies, I believe the press will report anything on the world with fear or hesitation. The press has always practiced censorship but one of the critiera's that editors use to make self-censorship is the current state of public sensibilities. I believe there are truths in Journalism, it is hard to tell what is true ans what is not. Journalist duty is to further the people that seeks truth and provides a fair and comprehensive issues and events. Journalist should be honest, fair when gathering information and recognize a special obligation to ensure that the publics business is conduct in the open and that government records are open to inspection.
Donald Gobert
I agree with Elizabeth in that multiple journalists can take different views on the same topic. This is just another argument in favor of competition in the marketplace of ideas. While no journalist can be entirely objective, there are certainly those who make more of an effort to objectivity than others: consider Kovach and Rosenstiel's "journalism of verification" versus the "journalism of affirmation." If someone only digests the news from a single, subjective source, such as Rush Limbaugh, there is no way that he or she will have a truthful, factual perspective on an event. Yet if one takes the effort to read multiple stories on a single topic, or follow a topic across any number of news days, they will begin to get a more "truthful" perspective. I am particularly moved by the quotation that the "search for truth becomes a conversation" (44): a good conversation depends on a variety of inputs, which infers a good amount of competition.
Soren Jordan
I'll start by saying that "The Truth is out there." After that, though, one has to concede that one person's truth may not be held by another. So to some extent, truth is subjective. In my opinion, the news should be reported as is; legitimate facts only. From those facts, the truth can be easily traced from a journalist's standpoint. (This being said, it would be very tough for someone to make an accurate assessment of a situation when the reality is 'self-created', as George Bush states in the book.)
To me, pursuing truth is like chasing a rainbow; it's there, but we can't quite yet get to it. All that we can do is to acknowledge its existence and continue to pursue it.
-BZ
It can be very difficult in todays world of journalism to come up with the complete truth. With so many ways to gather information and facts today it is hard to determine which are true. The only thing that a journalist can do is to write about the story from there perspective using facts that have been stated as being true. This way a person can be truthful without necissarily having all the facts because within their world of truth the story they wrote was true even if the facts are not true. The only real way to have a story be true of facts is for the journalist to be a witness to the act. Even then though the story can be skewed and affected by the journalists personal experiences.
last post was Richard Why sorry
I agree with what everyone else here has said...it seems as though there is no absolute truth in journalism. So what does journalism report if it's not the absolute truth??? I agree with what David Bartlett says,"the press is a mirror on society, a reflection of the passions of the day." Most journalism in my oppinion is "journalism affirmation;" the news reports on what they believe the people will enjoy or react to. They present a situation or facts that they think people want to see, and they let them form their own oppinions about it. An example of this is showing three homicide stories in one show or in one paper, thus making the audience believe the world is more dangerous today then last year. Bill Keller states that journalists are not here to cover objective truth, they are here to "strive for coverage that aims as much as possible to present the reader with enough information to make up his or her mind." However, I am sure they only choose the stories that will allow them more readers or viewers. I also have a question for Professor Coward: if journalists are supposed to cover the truth...how can we have tabloids?
Courtney Chadney
Achieving truth in journalism is at the very least, complicated. Truth does not simply mean "just the facts". Which facts? All of them? Just as many as you need to tell the story? How do you pick which ones you need versus the ones you do not? Perhaps "truth" in journalism means a completely objective and all inclusive account of an event. If that is "truth" in journalism, how do you compress it or reformat it in order to meet the demands of your superior? All a journalist can do is try.
J. Niebergall
Post a Comment