What is the Job of News Media?

Forums:
Email this Topic • Print this Page

The fourth estate is a term that positions the press (newspapers) as a fourth branch of government
and one that is important to a functioning democracy.

The phrase is attributed to Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797), a British politician, as quoted in Thomas Carlyle's book, "Heros and Hero Worship in History" (1841):

Quote:

There are three Estates in Parliament, but in the Reporters Gallery yonder, there sat a fourth Estate more important far than they all.

When I bitch and moan that the press is not doing their job because they let politicians get away with lies, I often get the response “Well, what do you think the job of the media is?”

I thought it a discussion – worthy topic. News media has certainly changed in the last 50 years. With increased emphasis on being entertaining, and increased pressure to be 24 hour news that’s ‘always on’, perhaps it’s understandable that media’s role is a little harder to define now than in the time before CNN, Jon Stewart and Fox.

When there are life and death issues, or internationally-significant issues, or issues related to the security of this nation… I think the role of the journalist takes on increased significance. In other words, when there is serious news being made or reported upon, I would like to think that part of the role of the journalist is to get to the truth of a thing – as much as is within their power to do.

When Hillary Clinton says she was in a group of people that received sniper fire in Bosnia, that is something that is either true or not true – there is no almost received sniper fire. When Donald Trump says he and Vladimir Putin have spoken directly, there is no sort of – he either did or did not have direct conversation with the man.

When conducting an interview of one of the two people who will be the next holder of arguably the most powerful office in the world, I submit that it is the sacred duty of a journalist not to let a known lie go unchallenged. I say a known lie because I realize there are times when the journalists themselves are uninformed.
When a public figure – especially a public figure vying for the highest office of public service - repeats something that has been thoroughly debunked and fact-checked and found to be false, and the reporter is aware of the falsehood but plays along to buy ratings or further their own career, I say they are not doing their job. I say they are letting down the people they are supposed to keep informed of the truth.

What do you say?

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 7 • Views: 582 • Replies: 18

Hmmm...
Maybe too hard a question?

0 Replies

Based on the number of countries that wield an agenda today, I don't believe the masses can handle the truth many times. I tend to think of the news media as first responders that tell accident victime to stay calm, so they don't go into shock. A cynical attitude, but based on my own observations. I even think the weather news might be spoon fed to us, to allay any movements en masse. The reality might be that many could be like Chicken Little, quick to say the sky is falling, if they knew "the rest of the story".

1 Reply

@snood,

I think it's a good question, but I'm not sure of the answer.

Part of me thinks that their job is to make money by grabbing viewers. But I also recognize that "we the people" are greatly dependent on the News Media to provide us an accurate view of the things that we cannot witness first hand (which is most thing outside of our tiny little geography).

And I think there is a real and growing problem with losing un-biased news sources. But how much of the blame for that falls on our shoulders as consumers. If all we ever read and spend our money on is cat videos and "real" housewives, then what's the media to do?

1 Reply

@Foofie,

Foofie wrote:

Based on the number of countries that wield an agenda today, I don't believe the masses can handle the truth many times. I tend to think of the news media as first responders that tell accident victime to stay calm, so they don't go into shock. A cynical attitude, but based on my own observations. I even think the weather news might be spoon fed to us, to allay any movements en masse. The reality might be that many could be like Chicken Little, quick to say the sky is falling, if they knew "the rest of the story".

So, are you saying the role of the media is sort of like a nurse maid for the public - only feeding us what they think we are capable of digesting?

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

rosborne979 wrote:

I think it's a good question, but I'm not sure of the answer.

Part of me thinks that their job is to make money by grabbing viewers. But I also recognize that "we the people" are greatly dependent on the News Media to provide us an accurate view of the things that we cannot witness first hand (which is most thing outside of our tiny little geography).

And I think there is a real and growing problem with losing un-biased news sources. But how much of the blame for that falls on our shoulders as consumers. If all we ever read and spend our money on is cat videos and "real" housewives, then what's the media to do?

I hear you, but that's where professional ethics and the like come into play, I think. I mean just because the public chooses to consume the TV News equivalent of crack cocaine, that doesn't mean that TV News corporations should be all crack all the time, you know?

1 Reply

Quote snood:

Quote:

When a public figure – especially a public figure vying for the highest office of public service - repeats something that has been thoroughly debunked and fact-checked and found to be false, and the reporter is aware of the falsehood but plays along to buy ratings or further their own career, I say they are not doing their job.

Hard to say. You could make the case that the job of the reporter was to accurately report what the person said and let the viewer decide. If the reporter challenges the interviewee too much, at that point the reporter becomes part of the story, which shouldn't be.

0 Replies

@snood,

snood wrote:

When I bitch and moan that the press is not doing their job because they let politicians get away with lies, I often get the response “Well, what do you think the job of the media is?”

Does that question imply that it is the press' job to let politicians get away with lies?

If the press is the fourth estate, then they certainly are politicians, and would let politicians of their own political leanings, at least, get away with lies.

0 Replies

@snood,

snood wrote:

Foofie wrote:

Based on the number of countries that wield an agenda today, I don't believe the masses can handle the truth many times. I tend to think of the news media as first responders that tell accident victime to stay calm, so they don't go into shock. A cynical attitude, but based on my own observations. I even think the weather news might be spoon fed to us, to allay any movements en masse. The reality might be that many could be like Chicken Little, quick to say the sky is falling, if they knew "the rest of the story".

So, are you saying the role of the media is sort of like a nurse maid for the public - only feeding us what they think we are capable of digesting?

You are putting a different spin on what I said. My spin is that it is required, if one wants the system to continue to function in a world where many are jealous of what America has.

0 Replies

I'm long gone from the realm of TV (hah! TB is what I first typed), but I sometimes look at news videos, which are only short impressions. I tried to listen to Rachel Maddow yesterday, I forget what thread and person pointed that newscast out, and could hardly stand her stridence - and I'm a person that probably agrees with her on much.

One of my girlfriend group pals was a long time TV anchor in, over time, three cities. She was a friend long before I saw any newscast by her, and in time learned she wrote her own stories and produced a lot of documentaries. I don't remember her going political on the news; she was more a reporter and interviewer. She covered the Mexico City earthquake shortly after it happened.. flying down there.
Anyway, my point is, she wasn't obnoxious. I have trouble with sports newscasters' behaviors, um, very jumpy.
In real life, that friend has spoken with us re her views on what was happening re this or that and they were thoughtful.

I guess I get it that tv news is a multifed system - plain old reporting, and plain or fancy opinionating, often sparked by politics. salt shakers needed.

0 Replies

@snood,

snood wrote:

I hear you, but that's where professional ethics and the like come into play, I think. I mean just because the public chooses to consume the TV News equivalent of crack cocaine, that doesn't mean that TV News corporations should be all crack all the time, you know?

I hear ya, but unfortunately, professional ethics won't help them if they run out of money. First and foremost they are businesses which need to sell something in order to collect money for operating expenses (like hiring good reporters). As their revenues go down, if they go down, they will have to cut corners to keep running.

Publicly funded agencies are also an option, but then they are just receiving funding from whatever group they are best at soliciting from.

It's a difficult problem. I don't have a good answer. I tend to donate to the sources I like to listen to, but I'm probably a very small minority. I suspect that the bulk of the revenue for sites like CNN now comes from advertisers who provide those little video links you see on their page. And there are also items which are made to look like news articles which are in fact just paid advertising disguised as news.

Meanwhile real physical newspapers are going out of business. I've never read a newspaper in my life (well, barely ever) and I never intend to again. I think they are a waste of paper. But at the same time, I know that many of those organizations were the primary source for real journalistic reporting. Their medium just got superseded.

I wish I had a good solution to this problem.

0 Replies

I didn't reply at first, snood, because I pretty much agree with what you said.

I'll add one more thing: even if a reporter doesn't have an obligation to fact check Trump's answers and catch all the blatant lies, the reporter at least needs to make sure Trump answers the question that was asked instead of launching into a lot of tangentially related BS that only has a few keywords in common with the question, as Trump often gets away with doing.

0 Replies

What is the Job of News Media?

To sell advertising.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

What is the Job of News Media?

To sell advertising.

There have to be some journalists out there with some whistle-blowing instincts and some idealism. Or are we all just unalterably fucked if we want our news reporters to serve our best interests?

1 Reply

@snood,

snood wrote:

Setanta wrote:

What is the Job of News Media?

To sell advertising.

There have to be some journalists out there with some whistle-blowing instincts and some idealism. Or are we all just unalterably fucked if we want our news reporters to serve our best interests?

To play any sport with the intention of winning, one must know the rules of scoring. My point being if one is aware of non-idealistic goals in much of the media, one is not "f*cked," one just knows what to expect and act accordingly.

1 Reply

@Foofie,

I didn't mean totally fucked. Just fucked insofar as getting ethical, thorough news reporting regularly.

1 Reply

@snood,

snood wrote:

I didn't mean totally fucked. Just fucked insofar as getting ethical, thorough news reporting regularly.

I think spending time in the military can "spoil" someone for civilian life, since many that I met in the military really wanted to do a good job, to the best of their ability. In civilian life I tended to meet many that were just feathering their own nest, so to speak.

1 Reply

@Foofie,

Foofie wrote:

snood wrote:

I didn't mean totally fucked. Just fucked insofar as getting ethical, thorough news reporting regularly.

I think spending time in the military can "spoil" someone for civilian life, since many that I met in the military really wanted to do a good job, to the best of their ability. In civilian life I tended to meet many that were just feathering their own nest, so to speak.

Yeah, I can bear witness that ex-military folks generally seem to adapt better to situations that require rigorously and consistently applying themselves, and that contrast between civilian and military mindset is even more stark the more necessary it is to operate within a structured environment.
I know some would say that's only because civilian life is more free and creative, but I think an argument could be made that discipline and order are at least as important to productivity as spontaneity.

1 Reply

@snood,

snood wrote:

Foofie wrote:

snood wrote:

I didn't mean totally fucked. Just fucked insofar as getting ethical, thorough news reporting regularly.

I think spending time in the military can "spoil" someone for civilian life, since many that I met in the military really wanted to do a good job, to the best of their ability. In civilian life I tended to meet many that were just feathering their own nest, so to speak.

Yeah, I can bear witness that ex-military folks generally seem to adapt better to situations that require rigorously and consistently applying themselves, and that contrast between civilian and military mindset is even more stark the more necessary it is to operate within a structured environment.
I know some would say that's only because civilian life is more free and creative, but I think an argument could be made that discipline and order are at least as important to productivity as spontaneity.

That's an affirmative!

0 Replies

Forums
» What is the Job of News Media?

Read Question
Reply to All

What is the Job of News Media?

Quick Links

My Account

able2know