It’s impossible to pin point a single individual or group for the recent decline in respectable, accurate journalism. It is an accumulation of a lot of factors. Blame can be placed on news outlets, advertisers, politics and even the audience.
Over this past week, our class discussed several problems and analyzed different examples to understand the current status of our journalism field. So what do we do to fix it?
One suggestion was a movement from the audience. In this solution, the standards of journalism would change only if the audience demanded a better product. Media content has shifted towards an entertainment style, reporting on events and stories that cater towards an audience that is hungry for this sensational style of news.
This idea raises the discussion of ‘what came first, the chicken or the egg.’ Did news outlets force the audience into this sensational complacency or did the audience demand this type of news? I don’t know; nor, do I know about the whole chicken or egg thing, too. But I do think it’s on the shoulders of the audience to demand a better product. What’s going to stop news outlets from cooking up below-average content if the audience still gorges themselves on this junk news? If we want better journalism, let these big news organizations get the message.
Another issue similar to the one above was the idea of news as entertainment. A lot of people think that journalism has shifted towards producing mostly sensationalized news. But I think there is a big difference between news as entertainment and news as entertaining. News organizations need to focus on finding new and engaging ways to tell their stories. Make the stories fun for people to read and interact with. They could invest in new technologies and hire interactive media specialists to showcase their content.
One last potential solution to the growing problem of journalism was the notion of providing public subsidies to news groups. This idea sounds like the most promising, but it also comes with a lot of concerns, too. How would we determine who qualifies for government assistance? How do we monitor groups that get funding? And once news group receive the assistance, how do we keep the government out of the news making process? A couple suggestions were to give the assistance to groups with a specific education background and to provide funding to groups who do a specific type of journalism, like investigative journalism. As for keeping the government and special interests groups out of the news making process, the idea was brought up in class to keep the group or person from where the money is coming from as anonymous. This would stop news outlets from producing news with an agenda.
