Tuesday, 4/29/97 Incredibly true stories of news gone awry
Journalists owe responsibility to society to report with
objectivity
OK, I understand that the average television show has no point
other than entertain the viewer with thin humor and bad acting.
However, going into a television show, the audience knows that it
isn’t real, the story isn’t real and that most of the actors’ body
parts aren’t real. But it seems to me that sitcoms, dramas and
professional wrestling aren’t the only types of television
programming that rely on fictionalizations to boost ratings.
Televised news magazines started the trend of corrupting broadcast
journalism with dramatization, but now it seems that the local news
and even some national news shows are becoming tabloid-esque in
their reporting. "The following is based on actual events, although
by now it has been twisted and convoluted to such a degree that it
no longer bears any resemblance to the truth." This disclaimer
could precede almost any newscast. The stories that do reflect some
aspect of reality use graphic, cliched and biased adjectives to
describe the events. No longer is it: "The suspect was charged
today with first-degree murder." Rather, it becomes "Richard Vega
was charged today with the grisly, violent deaths of two Southland
victims." That’s great if Richard Vega really committed the crime,
but if he’s innocent, the jury pool may have been unknowingly
prejudiced. Not only have you presented a depiction of the crime
that may be open to interpretation, but you have also created a
"him-vs.-them" mentality, with "him" being the accused and "them"
being the victims. And the reference to the Southland only creates
a stronger sense of connection to the victims and less objectivity
when judging the man’s guilt. Although it is possible to empathize
with the victims and still justly find the suspect innocent, this
method of reporting makes it difficult. This trend of tabloid
reporting also tends to avoid actual news stories that deal with
issues that may have a direct impact on its audience. Instead,
stories about changes in the government and business news are
pre-empted for celebrity gossip. And worse still, most of this news
is reported with key words such as "maybe" and "perhaps," reducing
those already pitiful stories to mere rumor in an attempt to
out-scoop competitors. I don’t see how the news that Sandra Bullock
may have gotten married could be of more importance than a report
on an escaped convict. Now, I’m not saying that I don’t like to be
up-to-date on the goings-on of my favorite celebrities, but there’s
a place for that. Prying and making unfounded assumptions about the
intimate details of the personal lives of the famous is what
entertainment magazines and television shows are for. I mean, it
wouldn’t be America if paparazzi didn’t hang over the gate of
Michael Jackson’s house, now would it? But it is entirely unfair to
limit my criticism solely to television. Much print journalism,
including most major newspapers, read more like romance novels and
Nancy Drew mysteries than objective reports of factual information.
It is true that money rules the minds of men. Sadly, this greed has
caused journalists, editors and news executives to ignore
journalism’s responsibility to society. They are given a freedom
that no other industry is allowed – a freedom ensured by the
constitution, one of the fundamental building blocks of our
government. But there’s no doubt in my mind that this freedom is
being abused. I’m not advocating censorship, but rather a
self-imposed sense of responsibility. Though the news media’s
primary goal may be to make money, its primary function is to
provide information that affects the public in a straightforward
and truthful manner. Perhaps I am too idealistic, but I think that
providing the public with factual, reliable non-exploitative news
can be profitable. I don’t think the public is so stupid that they
can’t follow a newscast that isn’t written like a screenplay for a
new Arnold Schwarzenegger flick, and I don’t think, given the
opportunity, they would reject a more objective form of news. News
organizations owe it to America to provide an outlet for more
accountable news coverage. And I think this is what the American
public wants and is willing to pay for. But maybe news
organizations will need to see a seductive headline like "Trampy
news is abandoned by a desperate America" before they figure it
out. Kester is a first-year undeclared student. Alicia Kester