What is a phenomenon that you see in news that you find troubling? Is it unethical? What standards of ethics do you feel are under challenge? What should our industry do in such a case?
One phenomenon that I find troubling is the amount of investigative journalism meant more for entertainment than news. Many news outlets have turned to an almost "yellow journalism" and a sensational look at news. CNN's Nancy Grace is a prime example. The talk show host has interrogated many, speculated about cases that haven't even been heard before a judge yet, and does it all in the name of journalism. Her antics provide for an entertaining show-- but is it really news?
Some may say she has the background as a journalist, and therefore it makes her qualified to spread the news. I would agree in a sense, but the manner in which she conveys news is more sensational than newsworthy. Her speculation on cases has recently led to a lawsuit against her. She questioned a woman on her show about the whereabouts of the woman's sun. Apparently, the questioning turned to speculation that the woman may have been involved or responsible for her son's disappearance. The woman committed suicide shortly after the show, and the family filed suit. Was Grace's conduct an act of investigative journalism or just a way to get a rise out of a lackluster audience?
MSNBC's Dateline has also walked a thin line between investigative journalism and sensationalism with their series "To Catch A Predator." The show which is designed to lure potential online predators into the hands of authorities is a set-up of sorts. The show is creating the news as opposed to the news creating the journalism. Should journalists cross this line? I would argue no, however there is a school of thought that says journalists have a commitment to the public to make them aware of situations and "To Catch A Predator" is a perfect example. I believe we do have a commitment to the public, but for journalists to create a stake-out and then write about it follows along the lines of yellow journalism in my opinion.
These are just a couple examples of investigative journalism that may have taken us back to the days of Hearst-- but I am sure there are many more to come, which is what bothers me the most.
I agree. Sensationalized investigative journalism is a very disturbing trend.
ReplyDeleteThere is also a case of suicide linked to "To Catch a Predator."
In 2006, they shot an episode in Murphy, TX. An ADA from a neighboring town had an explicit chat, but never showed up to the house where they were taping. The police claim that NBC then urged them to arrest him at his house the next day while the tagged along to tape it. The ADA shot himself. His sister sued, and they settled out of court.
I am from that area, and the fallout caused a huge uproar. Residents were so mad that the city manager lost his job, and the DA refused to prosecute any of the other men. It was a circus.
Regardless of whose idea it was to arrest the ADA at his house, the fact that NBC was willing to hunt down this man goes to show how profit-driven this type of journalism is.
It seems that this man was tormented by his desires, and I think that is the story, not this gotcha journalism junk.
You are spot on. I CANNOT STAND THAT NANCY GRACE. Her show is speculative and almost like a mob-led witch hunt. Cannot stand it.
ReplyDeleteOverall I think investigative journalism is a useful device in our society, but I absolutely see how it goes over the top. "To Catch a Predator" is wildly entertaining but what does it contribute to society besides over-exaggerated parental fear of the internet and chat rooms? This can be done without instilling that immense fear. Instead, the network can run a one-time story about the dangers of the internet and recommended how to keep children safe. It accomplishes everything that "To Catch A Predator" does and may even add some substance.
Your points were concise and the overall post was well-constructed. Bravo.
Without sounding like a self-inflated [expletive]...there's a small typo in paragraph three.
Good post. The points were well delivered. I do think your blog could have benefited from a few resource links (we'll work on that).
ReplyDeleteThe typo was most unfortunate. And I don't think spell check would have helped on this one. Just be more careful in future posts.