Keith Olbermann: biased journalist

Television host, Keith Olbermann, was suspended November 5^th without pay for making monetary contributions to several political candidates. He claims that he never encouraged anyone else to contribute publicly or privately, and that this was his first time contributing. The liberal host was reinstated on November 9^th 2010. Mr. Olbermann should not have been reinstated so quickly because he compromised his journalistic integrity by openly choosing a political side. Journalists are supposed to remain objective, however by donating money to only one type of politician; it was quite obvious where he stood politically. Journalists need to avoid any type of conflict of interest in order to maintain their objectivity. It does not matter if this is perceived or real, people should have to know you personally in order to know your political stance. No one will respect a journalist opinion if they believe that their own political prejudices are getting in the way of their objectivity. They also need to avoid open political involvement. This goes right along with avoiding conflicts of interest. As a journalist, politics is going to be a hot button issue, the audience needs to believe that you are being fair and unbiased, so that they can make a fair and unbiased decision themselves. Using the power of the media, to push a political agenda is manipulative, especially when the public trust you. And finally journalists must stay far away from any association that may damage their credibility. In the case of Olbermann, any viewer who has read the story, or even heard about his suspension, will see him in a different light. He will not longer be the unbiased television host looking out for the audiences good, instead he will be an agenda pushing news anchor, and the respect and credibility level will go down. Many people say that journalists should have the right to show their support in politics, however they chose this profession, and it is not their job to give their personal opinion; it is their job to report the news truthfully and accurately without bias. Instead of reporting personal opinion Olbermann simply needs to report the truth, that is the most important thing that he could do. Hopefully in the future Mr. Olbermann, along with other journalists will learn to keep their personal opinions under wraps, and share only what can be proven with the public.

"Fatal Distraction"

I read “Fatal Distraction”, by Gene Weingarten. It is the story of women and men who forgot their children in their cars, and as a result the children all passed away. They died of hyperthermia. When I first heard that term I thought “hypothermia”, which is an abnormally low body temperature, however HYPERthermia is the opposite, it is an abnormally high body temperature. When a child is left in a hot car, for an extended period of time, it causes their body temperature to go up, which ensues in death. The subject itself made the article a perfect “feature article”. Parents are becoming busier, in many homes both parents work, and this contributes to the stress level. In high stress situations, our brains go into autopilot, and that is when the baby gets forgotten. We think we dropped them off at day care, when in reality; they are sitting in the back seat the whole time. This is becoming something that happens more and more often, so it is a hot topic. It’s something of interest, and it’s something people need to read so they are aware of the dangers! I read the entire article from start to finish, the author kept me interested with the way he told the story of each person. I even got choked up as I read, heartbroken by the way the children died, and the misery and guilt their parents must be feeling! I feel as though the author posed a question without out right saying it, should parents that forget their children be prosecuted to the extent of the law, or is the death of their child and the grief and guilt that goes with that, punishment enough? That is another reason it is such a great feature! It leaves you asking yourself questions, and searching for your own answers! By the end of the article I came to this conclusion: Gene Weingarten is an amazing writer, and completely worthy of his Pulitzer Prize!

Hyper localism and it's affects

What is hyper localism? Before these video clips, I had never heard this term. Hyper localism is news coverage of very local events, but to the exclusion of more important world events. According to one of the reporters, "News is what matters to people." I don't necessarily agree with this statement. Should whether or not a story matters to people be how we measure a stories newsworthiness? Or is there some kind of higher standard for the news? I would say yes, there is a higher standard, a news story should influence more than just a group of people, or one person; it should influence the world! The trend has been shows that are consumer friendly, such as to catch a predator. They are shows that draw crowds in by speaking to their fear or curiosity. Instead of focusing on a war, or a civil war in another country, or even a national oil crisis, the news concentrates on "catching predators", or some other form of reality t.v. It is localized, and doesn't take into account the big picture!

For journalism students, this means learning a whole new way of doing things. They are learning how to look at news from a global or national perspective, not a local perspective. Now they have to adjust their way of thinking, writing, and working. They will have to come at a story in a much different way than what they are used to. Students are going to want to seek out jobs and internships at local papers, to get an idea of what is going on in the community. It will show them what individuals want to hear about, and give them a less globalized perspective.

Through this hyper localism, the way news shows are done is changing. They are being given a smaller budget, and still expected to give the same amount of news. This presents a problem for the reporters. Also due to new technology they have to change the way they do their news stories, and learn all the new forms of media. Technology is constantly changing, forcing the news community to change with it. Is this good or bad? I don't think there is one answer to that question, it is based on your personal preference. I personally believe that as the news changes, something is lost. We lose knowledge and appreciation of the world around us as we become consumed with our own local agenda.

Objectivity in Journalism

Objectivity in journalism is something that writers have been chasing after since the first written records, but the real question is, is this goal even achievable? Or are all journalists on a wild goose chase, seeking a goal they will never reach? Before we can answer that question, I think we need to define what it means to be objective. According to dictionary.com, to be objective is to, “not be influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased.” In theory it sounds so simple, but to actually put this into practice proves much more difficult. Humans are prone to making a judgment about a person or a situation before they even know what is really going on, however I believe that it is possible to prevent this from happening. It would take time and discipline, but it is possible. David Brooks, author of “Objectivity in Journalism”, provides a way to measure our objectivity and viable steps to achieve it. He says, “I think that there is truth out there, and that objectivity is like virtue; it’s the thing you always fall short of, but the thing you always strive toward.” We may never achieve perfect objectivity, but we can come as close as humanly possible.
Brooks gives us steps to remain objective. The first one is to look at all the facts, not just the ones that confirm what we believe. That isn’t always easy, but it’s extremely important! The second step is to remain modest. This means to limit your self-exposure, and seek more than just a boost for your ego. The third step is to process all the data, you have to make sure and take into account every single fact, so that you don’t come to a biased conclusion. The fourth stage is the ability to betray friends. This sounds heartless, but you have to have the strength to seek the absolute truth, not your friends or coworker’s truth. The 5th stage is the ability to ignore stereotypes, this is not easy because whether it’s on purpose or by accident we stereotype, but in order to remain truth objective, we have to master this. The last stage is to understand that you need to be a little dull. It’s easy to blast someone with a mean article, but more often than not, it is undeserved. When we follow these steps we are well on our way to being objective! Although it will take time and effort, writing objectively is completely possible. I never said it would be easy, but as journalists and Christians, your job is to bring the whole truth, not just your own truth!

"Why Tell the Truth?" by Joseph Stowell

In his article “Why Tell the Truth”, Joseph Stowell writes about the importance of telling in the truth in all circumstances. He says, “It is the underlying foundation for trust, confidence, integrity, faith, security, and stability.” (Why tell the truth). When we lie or omit certain truths we break down trust and confidence in all of our relationships. Stowell writes that a relationship will not last if it is not based on truth, and mutual trust. Truth aligns us with God, God is truth so when we are truthful, we are being more like him. When we lie we are straying from the very character of God, and his redemption loses its value. Truth telling is our basis of worshiping God. If we are to bring God glory in all we do, how can we possibly do that if we are lying? And finally, truth telling is submission to God’s will for our life. He desire righteousness from us, and when we lie, we are not being righteous. Stowell says, “our joy cannot be full if we get involved with falsehoods.” (Why Tell the Truth).
There are different way to be untruthful; beguilement, deceit, lying, and false witness. Beguilement is when you reach a false conclusion about something or someone, it may be on purpose or by accident, but it is often due to insufficient facts. In journalism, beguilement is the most prevalent in gossip columns. The columnist make false assumptions about others, and then share them with their readers. “Beguilement is the sin of disseminating false conclusions. It is to delude or be deluded.” (Stowell) Deceit is arranging the facts to distort the truth. It is most often used for manipulation, for example in journalism, sometimes when an interview is done, the reporter will print a quote but leave out the beginning or the end, or even the middle to make it seem like the person was saying something different than they really said. Or they will even quote the person out of context, which makes the quote say something completely different than what the person meant. A deceitful statement starts out true, but by the end of it, is completely distorted. Lying is completely telling an untruth. Often journalists will lie about a source, or more commonly will plagiarize and claim someone else’s work as their own. This completely breaks down the trust relationship, and often will cost the journalist their job, and their credibility. The last one the article talked about was false witness. This is when someone brings false testimony against another person, often for their own personal gain. Journalists are famous for doing this because they have the power of the press, so if they don’t like someone they will just write a negative story on them. This is perhaps the worst one because it ruins reputations and families. Each way ruins relationships, and will completely ruin your testimony!
I think the most important point that Stowell makes is that truth telling is a part of the character of God, and we were created to be like him, so we need to be truthful. God created us to reflect his character, but if we are lying, or being deceitful, we are so far from him. Our sole purpose for life is to bring him glory but we are not doing that when we are dishonest. As Christian’s we need to make it our goal to be honest, and loving, seeking the best interests of others, and the heart of God.

Stowell, Joseph. "Why Tell the Truth." Heartcry Journal 47 (1998): n. pag. Web. 9 Sep 2010.

critique of "Christian View Of Journalism"by David Aikman

Every profession has a positive or negative connotation attached to it, meaning it’s either a honorable or dishonorable profession to have. We may not consciously have these thoughts, but they are there. For example when one thinks of a lawyer often they think of someone who is deceptive or sneaky. We have all heard a lawyer joke or two before, a perfect example being a one-liner that I have heard on more than one occasion: “How can you tell when a lawyer is lying?” and the punch line is, “His lips are moving.” This implies that lawyers are very deceitful people, with every word out of their mouth being a lie. This is obviously not true of all, but we still assign this connotation to all lawyers. An example of a positive connotation would one that we assign to journalists. They are seen as truth seekers, and as an honest group of people, when often this is far from the truth. They have a hidden agenda, looking out more for their story and themselves, then for the subject of the story. In the article it starts out with a discussion at a university with a dozen panelists, two of them being Peter Jennings and Mike Wallace, who are both reporters. They were asked that if they were invited to follow a enemy nation in a mission that would result in the death of American troops, would they go? At first Jennings said he would do everything in his power to warn the Americans, but Wallace was out raged saying that he doesn’t have a higher calling then one to be a journalist. Personally I find that to be absolutely slimy, selfish and cruel! The only reason they have the right to be a reporter, is because they are American first. Why would they put their career above people? I understand there is a desire for truth, but what about the sanctity of human life, or loyalty to your country? It seems that journalists have this all for one attitude, and care only about the impact their assignment will have on themselves and their own career, but they do not care how it impacts anyone else. When I think of journalist in the secular world, I seldom think of a kind caring human being, but of someone who is out for their own good only and the advancement of their own career. What investigative journalism has become is not what it started out as, and not what it should be, and the key to changing it as Christians is to put people before career, it’s that simple. We love others because Jesus loves us.