Quote:
Originally posted by KSig RC
In a certain sense, it's the fall of one of the last "good-ol' boy" networks, specifically Washington journalism. The reality is that, no matter how intense their effects on the populus, journalists are not trained or held to the standards of a lawyer or doctor. Their credentials are largely honor- or (to a lesser extent) merit-based, and you're seeing a backlash against those who have abused the privilege, in my mind.
Just like every other backlash, it will go too far, then regress to the mean - hopefully, this leads to an era of greater accountability for those who carry journalistic/reporting credentials, instead of continuing down the path of sensationalism but simply changing the media of choice to the sketchy weblog.
|
Hopefully this all is a wake-up call to those who run journalism programs; as you said, there's been less of the "good ol' boy" network lately, and more journalists who have earned their way through a combination of schooling and experience.
It's tough to walk the line sometimes; if you want to work in a major media market, you need to get noticed. For more and more young journalists, getting noticed can lead to unethical behavior (Jayson Blair, for example). Is this corrected with more vigilant faculty on the college level (I had many professors who required contact info for all sources)? Does more professional experience, whether through internships or college jobs, help to eliminate some of this nonsense?
The stuff of Hearst and early journalists just won't cut it anymore. We're in a whole new world for journalism, and hopefully journalists respond to this with increased concern for ethics.