But that traditional journalistic contract has broken down in recent years, probably reflecting news media's dire economic straits more than anything. 24-hour news cycles and infotainment have turned the typical story into something of a farce.
After more than a few reporters were found to be making things up, media outlets began explaining why sources were anonymous--"because the investigation is ongoing, because she is not authorized to speak to the media." Baby steps toward transparency.
It is so ubiquitous it's hard to summon outrage, but isn't it infuriating when the TV news says President Obama spoke and shows us mute video of him speaking, but then has the gall to tell us what he said? I understand that one of the finest orators of our time needs to be summarized for a short news show, but the reporters are not only selective in their topics, they can and do add significant spin. "The president said he was confident health care reform would pass," can be given a range of nuance from sarcasm to derision.
Journalists were never objective, but the old forms made us all complicit in a charade that worked, more or less. But it's time for a better approach before all the eyeballs the media is aching to monetize are glazed over. Transparency means a link to the video of the full speech, or the PDF of the actual document. If the story is about a new website, give readers the link even though it means they might (gasp) click away from your site.
No comments:
Post a Comment