"I became a journalist because I did not want to depend on the newspaper for information," is a quote by Christopher Hitchens, and I'm in complete agreement. Newspapers can easily become biased, and they sometimes leave out information in their articles to sway you to one side. At times they misinform the public.
When you're working at a newspaper you see everything before it gets edited, or changed into something the paper would prefer to let the public know. If you work for a newspaper, you get the information you want, without having to rely on other people to tell you what you want to know. I don't enjoy being dependent on people I don't trust, and I don't trust the newspaper. Whose to say they aren't lying to me?
I didn't get into journalism for the reason stated in the quote, but it is something that I can see cementing my beliefs that is you want the real news, you have to be the one getting it.
Journal
Thursday, May 24, 2012
State of Journalism
I have a few issues with the state of journalism currently, but there's one issue that stands out to me. Lately, news hasn't really been seeming like news. We hear about celebrities far more than we should, especially when most of what they do has nothing to do with news at all.
People aren't that interested in real news anymore, so journalists cater to the desires of the public. The Daily Show makes news comedic, which takes away from what news is really about. It isn't supposed to make you laugh. News is supposed to inform the general population of the serious issues happening around us.
It seems that most people don't even watch the news anymore, or read it form a newspaper. Instead, they see it on the Internet. A newspaper or a news show is less likely to be biased while reporting, because they could lose their jobs.
People aren't that interested in real news anymore, so journalists cater to the desires of the public. The Daily Show makes news comedic, which takes away from what news is really about. It isn't supposed to make you laugh. News is supposed to inform the general population of the serious issues happening around us.
It seems that most people don't even watch the news anymore, or read it form a newspaper. Instead, they see it on the Internet. A newspaper or a news show is less likely to be biased while reporting, because they could lose their jobs.
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Be Accountable
There are four ethical principles that journalists should follow. They are seek the truth and report it, minimize harm, act independently, and be accountable. All of them are equally important, but I'll be focusing on the last one, be accountable.
To be accountable basically means to take responsibility for one's article. You wrote it, if there's something wrong with it, you deal with the consequences. There's no one else you can blame. If someone gave you wrong information, you should have investigated more.
In life people are always telling you to take responsibility for your actions, and it carries over to almost everything. If you messed up, own up to it. There are only four ethical principles, so follow them. It's the right thing to do.
To be accountable basically means to take responsibility for one's article. You wrote it, if there's something wrong with it, you deal with the consequences. There's no one else you can blame. If someone gave you wrong information, you should have investigated more.
In life people are always telling you to take responsibility for your actions, and it carries over to almost everything. If you messed up, own up to it. There are only four ethical principles, so follow them. It's the right thing to do.
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Money For News
So, your editor accepts money from a politician to reveal some wrongful actions by another politician, which caused them to be removed form office. It's a good thing that the public found out ,but it isn't right that the editor accepted money to publish it as news. What do you do?
It's wrong that the editor accepted money, but it is a good thing that the politician was exposed before he could do any more damage. I'd be forced to admit that the editor might not deserve to lose their job. I would probably confront them and ask them to return the money. If they agreed then I'd just pretend it never happened. If they disagreed, I'd have to go to the publisher or another editor about it.
It's difficult to decide on issues like this because, although the means were less then moral, the end may have justified it. The results helped people in the end, so how can you say it was entirely wrong?
It's wrong that the editor accepted money, but it is a good thing that the politician was exposed before he could do any more damage. I'd be forced to admit that the editor might not deserve to lose their job. I would probably confront them and ask them to return the money. If they agreed then I'd just pretend it never happened. If they disagreed, I'd have to go to the publisher or another editor about it.
It's difficult to decide on issues like this because, although the means were less then moral, the end may have justified it. The results helped people in the end, so how can you say it was entirely wrong?
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Same Sex Marriages
I have never gotten why same sex marriages are an issue. Our country is supposed to be the land of freedom, right? Well, it isn't if people can't marry whoever the heck they want. It's basically an equivalent of racism only with your sexuality.
The arguments people have against gay marriage don't even make any sense. Some people say that it destroys the sanctity of straight marriages. You do realize that some people divorce over and over again.
Some say that a gay couple's children will become gay. That makes no sense. Not all children of a heterosexual couple are end up heterosexual.
It just seems impossible to me that people would try to take away someone's right because of what gender they prefer. I'm hoping that people will actually come to their senses, and realize that being against it is just as bad as being racist or sexist. We've gotten over those ridiculous views, so why can't we get over this?
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Dinosaur Gas
Some scientists believe that dinosaur farts could have warmed the Earth. This is of course only if you buy into the green house gases warming the Earth. Could this have actually caused the dinosaurs' extinction?
You may know something about cows producing methane. This gas warms the Earth, and scientists got the idea about the dinosaurs' gas from them. People say that farming cows in such a large number affects the Earth in a negative way, and that we need to stop it.
I doubt that the farming of cows is going stop, so how do we deal with this problem? I guess we could put the cows in some sort of bubble that has an air purifier in it. Then, the methane would be filtered out of the air in the bubble before it could hurt the atmosphere. It does sound a little ridiculous, but I'm not sure how else we could help.
You may know something about cows producing methane. This gas warms the Earth, and scientists got the idea about the dinosaurs' gas from them. People say that farming cows in such a large number affects the Earth in a negative way, and that we need to stop it.
I doubt that the farming of cows is going stop, so how do we deal with this problem? I guess we could put the cows in some sort of bubble that has an air purifier in it. Then, the methane would be filtered out of the air in the bubble before it could hurt the atmosphere. It does sound a little ridiculous, but I'm not sure how else we could help.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
Obama's Over Celebrating?
Obama's opponents have been claiming that he is "over celebrating" the death of Osama bin Laden. I'm just not seeing it. I agree with the fact that you shouldn't celebrate the killing of someone, but where exactly is the proof that he's doing it.
There's nothing wrong with appreciating that a man who killed over 3,000 citizens is no longer around to hurt people anymore, but there's no way we should throw a party over it. That's what I'd call over celebrating, and I'm not seeing that from anybody.
I think this is probably just Obama's opponents trying to make him look bad. I don't even support Obama, but I never support slandering someone for your own agenda. A huge amount of politicians do that now.
There's nothing wrong with appreciating that a man who killed over 3,000 citizens is no longer around to hurt people anymore, but there's no way we should throw a party over it. That's what I'd call over celebrating, and I'm not seeing that from anybody.
I think this is probably just Obama's opponents trying to make him look bad. I don't even support Obama, but I never support slandering someone for your own agenda. A huge amount of politicians do that now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)