A judge is sometimes forced to pull himself from a trial if the case presents him with some sort of conflict of interest. In the interest of full disclosure, I pulled myself from an objective article. I am still here, but a subjective column has replaced what would have been news.
On Tuesday, Cal State Long Beach held a series of discussions on social networking, strangely titled “Journalism Day.” Timeliness was the drink of the day though it hits you quicker if you smoke it with only the occasional buzz kill momentarily interrupting the party. This buzz kill was, of course, a reminder of the importance of accuracy in reporting. After all, in all aspects of life, it is the truth, not timeliness, that gains people’s trust.
As often is the case in my experience with journalism panels, more time was dedicated to wondering how news organizations can remain profitable, than in how to deliver quality work. I wonder if the two are somehow related.
Fortunately, all of the panelists drew the line at advertising within news stories. Apparently Honda won’t be taking out an ad in the next front page story in the Los Angeles Times detailing the Toyota recalls.
The discussions were yet another reminder to journalism students that being great at one thing is not nearly as important as being mediocre at many others.
The writers must take photos, the photographers must write stories and everyone better be able to dedicate a few hours each night to rummaging through the wastelands of Twitter and Facebook. This, needless to say, is done simply because someone else is doing it and they might post it a second faster than you.
Pick up bits of news and self-promote simultaneously — that’s the motto. Benjamin Franklin would have been thrilled.
I am no businessman and do not claim to be so, nor am I certain as to what the future holds for the news industry. However, I do feel certain that some industries are better off not being in a state of constant, reactionary concern about the bottom line. Ask any American with a pre-existing condition how this whole for-profit-medicine thing is going.
Unlike medical consumers, journalism consumers will survive the mistakes of a greed-driven industry — only they will be less knowledgeable because of them.
The length of a giraffe’s neck did not fluctuate as trees decreased or increased in length. The animal adapted carefully and with purpose over a long period of time. The journalism industry should model this natural mechanism.
The industry may remain profitable with smaller and more efficient staffs, more creative advertising and greater emphasis on instant news, but the quality of the content will suffer because of it.
As the industry increasingly searches for the cost efficient jack-of-all-trades, masters will be lost to other industries. The likes of Dorothea Lane, Mark Twain, Mathew Brady and Ernest Hemingway will be pushed elsewhere. I understand the importance social networking can play in journalism, but dedicating an entire “Journalism Day” to it, at the expense of the basic tenants of journalism, is a case of misplaced priorities.