Why Do You Think Journalists Should Provide a Public Forum- a Marketplace of Ideas?

I believe that journalism should invite and encourage both public opinion understanding. I find it necessary that individuals can look to journalism for an embracing of their ideas. I know that there is nothing more discouraging than when someone shoots down my ideas or discounts an opinion of mine. One of the liberties we as Americans should hold most dear and appreciated is the freedom of speech, and further, the freedom of press. We have been blessed with the freedom to express our opinions and ideas as diverse and unconsidered as they might be. Thus, I think journalism should foster this public conversation where the community feels free to declare whatsoever they would like to declare.

I do also believe however, that journalists should be very tactful in dictating how to provide a public forum. I think journalists should sift out what news and conversations are in the public’s best interest to explore. This in turn will create a safer marketplace of ideas where the conversations might be channeled towards certain topics or away from certain topics. As it is in relationships, education, the workplace and in journalistic forums some topics should be addressed at certain times and for certain reasons and others shouldn’t. Using tact is one of the most key things journalists can focus on. When journalists are tactful then the public form will truly become a marketplace of ideas that embraces and encourages opinions and ideas of all sorts.

Daniel Sinker, a journalism blogger, summed up perfectly this very idea, "I believe that experiments are crucial to new paths forward for journalism—that trying new ideas, making prototypes, embracing failure as an option (and learning tool), and iterating on experience are key. And so we need to try things, we need to build, Journalism needs to make."

http://sinker.tumblr.com/post/12301360208/journalism-in-the-open-making-a-new-reality

Do Journalists Fulfill Their Watchdog Role?

I believe that journalism houses a pretty interesting quality. I think journalism is different for each person. Journalism reaches everyone differently and what one person takes away from journalism could be incredibly different than what someone else takes from journalism. I think it has to do with what each reader is seeking.

            If the reader is seeking inspiring, comforting or even exciting stories, than those stories will stand out to them. The reader will gain the sense that the world is full of goodness and that mankind is innately moral.

            Now, on the other hand, if a different reader is seeking scary and disheartening stories that weaken the public’s faith in mankind, then that reader will find those stories.

            It’s been said that journalists are to, “comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.” What I gather from that is that journalism watches out for the reader and offers them what they are looking for. If the public needs to be more aware of a certain issue, be it personal or social, journalism steps up and showcases those stories. On the other hand, journalists also gauge if the public needs an inspirational, faith-building story. Journalists, then in this sense, fulfill the watchdog role by offering the public what it needs.

            

One investigative piece that has specifically influenced my life was written by Nigel Jacquiss and it is entitled, “The 30-Year Secret.” http://www.pulitzer.org/archives/7648

This piece showcases the scandal behind Portland, Oregon’s governor and his 3-year long sexual relationship with a 14-year old girl while in office. No word of the scandal was spoken until 30 years after the instance had occurred. What makes this piece so personally influential was that I lived in Portland while this very crime was being committed. Once Jacquiss published this story, Oregon was changed dramatically. The people became less trusting of officials and more aware of sexual crime. 

This is a picture of the governor, Neil Goldschmidt:

I believe because of Jacquiss and investigative reporting, Oregonians benefited from the fulfilled journalistic watchdog role. 

Journalists and Neutrality

So, the question at hand is how do journalists cover news and report stories while firmly planted in neutrality?

As we learned in the "The Elements of Journalism," neutrality is not a fundamental principle of journalism. Rather, it is predicated upon principles of honesty and truthfulness that journalism is founded. It is the journalist's responsibility to be able to create distance between themselves and the story and sources. Granted, the journalist will innately house opinions and perspectives specific to himself or herself—this is a given, and justifiably so. The difficulty and expertise then lies in the journalist’s capacity to create an unbiased, entirely honest story while still retaining his or her own personal view.

I can’t even imagine the difficulty some journalists face as they cover stories that probably hit really close to home for them. It must be so tough to report an event as an observer without inserting personal opinions or without even shading the story so as to reflect one side over another. This then represents the incredible skill journalists accommodate as they practice and create a habit of honest journalism, untainted by personal bias, yet without compromising the journalist’s own perspective.

Journalists aren't here to conform and become flat individuals devoid of opinions , nor are they here to drench our news with their partiality. Journalists are here to bring us honest news, while still maintaining a real interest in current events, as any involved citizen would.

This silly cartoon portrays biased journalism: 

This website takes a further look into journalists' responsibility to remain unbiased even on social media, or better yet, ESPECIALLY on social media:

http://www.ajr.org/article.asp?id=4837