: The lucky 60 percent…A race not worth winning…
I agree with David Shaw that it’s time for journalism to give up the competitive urge to be first with a story:
Timely, aggressive reporting can break important stories and bring attention to issues that might otherwise be neglected. But too often news organizations want to be first for the sake of being first, and the arguments they advance to justify that objective are “all rationalizations for the ingrained professional pathology of the press,” says Robert Lichter, president of the Washington-based Center for Media and Public Affairs. “At a time when you can find news instantly on the Internet or cable television, no one cares-or knows or remembers-which reporter beat another by three minutes. It has zero importance to the public or to any news source.”
I have argued before that I think it’s time for newspapers to focus on second-day coverage, i.e. deliver deep, sustained and accurate reporting of events over time–reporting that avoids the status quo bias by including diverse voices of authority. Let television be first, and let it be shallow and wrong. What television does better than any other medium is bring us instant pictures and the first rough look at a situation. What newspapers could do best (if publishers could stop trying to compete with television), as a medium of propositional content, is bring us accurate information and useful knowledge.
I’ve been thinking about this with regards to the number of excellent and/or popular political documentaries we’ve seen in the last year. I don’t think, for example, that F9/11 is reflective enough, even though I generally agree with Moore’s positions. But Control Room, especially, and Outfoxed, to a lesser extent, have been wonderfully reflective about the role of media in shaping political discourse. And of course one of the major benefits of a documentary film is that the later deadlines do allow more time to understand a story rather than rushing, as you say, to get the pictures out there.
Dr. Cline,
At least now you are in a position to hopefully instill this type of journalism philosophy into the minds of future journalists.
Well said! This is something that’s been on my mind for a long time, and I think it doesn’t just apply to newspapers. Magazine-type shows like 60 Minutes or 20/20 often only skim the surface of the topic they’re covering. Do they have to present three or four different 8-minute stories in an hour? Television time is virtually unlimited, and only constrained by a self-imposed structure.
Whether television comes on board or not, I’d love to see a culture of “get it first” be replaced by a culture of “get it right.” The question then becomes, is there a big enough market for newspapers that offer that kind of in-depth analysis? What will it take for people to want to read about yesterday’s news?
Chuck…
Film documentaries present an interesting rhetorical problem–the power is still in the pathos of the images, but the director can take the time to dig more deeply into a subject thus offering an more complex experience.
Stumax…
Re: yesterday’s news
I think this term hides an obvious fact: news unfolds over time. or, one might say news is defined over time. In either case, the newspaper is not yesterday’s news; it is today’s look at ongoing news.
Is there a market for it? Well, the newspaper industry has tried everything else. Let’s try being serious and see if that works.
Nothing to See Here
More stuff you _should_ be reading… * Via “MaxSpeak, You Listen!”:maxspeak.org/mt/ it’s the Presidential race “set to music”:http://www.plur.net/thisland.html. Tee hee. Presidential races set to music are funnee.
Reflective journalism is not journalism. It’s magazine writing, punditry and falling down on the job.
Journalism is about reporting the news, and the way news organizations build loyal followings is by being first and being the best with hard news and with created news. The Wall Street Journal is the best paper in the country because it breaks more stories than any other paper, it breaks more significant stories and it reports with more integrity than any other news organization in the world. And, because its strong news operation generates a strong following and return on equity, the Journal’s editorial page is the best researched and written commentary section and op-ed page in the world as well.
The Denver Post can’t even break local news before the news appears on TV, the radio or in the Rocky Mountain News or even in the local alternative weekly, WestWord. What’s worse, the paper isn’t even effectively “reflective.”
So, without a hard news operation, you can’t afford a good editorial page or op-ed page, and to be the best in hard news, you have to be first. I know, promoting competition in the real world is hard for some people to stomach, but that’s what sells newspapers and gets people to seek and deal with news and commentary.
Donald…
Re: …and to be the best in hard news, you have to be first. I know, promoting competition in the real world is hard for some people to stomach, but that’s what sells newspapers and gets people to seek and deal with news and commentary.
How do you know this? Opinion? Data?