I was watching a program over the weekend about advocacy journalism and whether it is journalism at all. Journalism should be, by definition, a fair and balanced presentation of the facts. Can journalist inject their coverage with personal comments? One journalist seemed to think so in this program. He claims no journalism is without advocacy, unless that journalist is devoid of his humanity. Controvesial claim?
But I say, if you want to inform AND persuade AND emote your audience into some kind of action, your role as a journalist has ceased and you become a advocate. Fear-mongering, which is so prevalent in North American journalism has become the norm. This does not mean it is right. Editing of facts and subsequent presentation often puts a new spin on the truth and this does not mean it is right either, simply because it is done.
We all know how much the media is capable of distorting the truth to sensationalise and gain higher readership or viewing audience. Advocacy journalism may be in good intent, but you cannot contribute to a good cause once it has been mired with journalist techniques of those who simply wish to bump up their numbers.
Become a true advocate and speak as an informed individual and not in the guise of a newspaper hack.
Have the Day That You Deserve
8 months ago
2 comments:
pro·pa·gan·da
Pronunciation: "prä-p&-'gan-d&, "prO-
Function: noun
Etymology: New Latin, from Congregatio de propaganda fide -Congregation for propagating the faith, organization established by Pope Gregory XV died 1623
1 capitalized : a congregation of the Roman curia having jurisdiction over missionary territories and related institutions
2 : the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person
3 : ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect
Yeah, that's it isn't it?
Post a Comment