back or facing the press error militant gringa
Friday, January 14, 2011
Butterfly 3rd Birthday Party Invitation Wording
By: Silvio Waisbord
The author is Professor of Journalism and Political Communication at George Washington University
WASHINGTON .- In a politically divided country is not surprising that journalism is divided. As in other Latin American democracies polarized, political divisions cross the Argentine journalism. As ever since the democratic restoration, the depth of differences, public fights and accusations between journalists and the media became famous.
Within this debate, has floated the idea of \u200b\u200b"activist journalism" as a desirable model. Despite being commonly used in Argentina's policy is not clear what "militant" when used for adjectives to journalism. Is it one that advocates a government or party beyond mistakes, secrets and contradictions? Is defending your convictions regardless of how the social demands become public policy? Is it ideologically pure or is a creature of realpolitik willing to tolerate any political negotiations? Is it journalism that reports on issues that strictly fit into the political agenda of one party or the government? Journalism Is that legitimate self-appointed voice of the popular will, unaware that the "popular" represents a civil society with many demands, needs, conflicts and interests?
The idea of \u200b\u200b"activist journalism" as an appendix to a party or government is problematic for democracy does not need a press that serves no official spokesman.
Ideally, journalists should be skeptical about the power and not be critical depending on political or ideological color who is in power. Data should show the reality because governments and parties tend to produce and believe in their reality. Should investigate the folds of government because power inevitably remains dark places. Should put the magnifying glass on issues that need public attention and the news does not justify according to the reason party. Should encourage citizens to know what ignorant instead of confirming their preconceptions militants. Should increase opportunities for the expression of citizenship and civic organizations and not be ventriloquist who are surrounded by microphones. Should mark the errors and omissions to any ruling and not to help cover whatever the justification. As Walter Lippmann pointed out, one of the most influential columnists in the United States over the past century: "Without critical journalism, reliable and intelligent, the government can not govern."
The best that journalism is not listed in the column marching behind a party or government. The last decade World Press confirms that good journalism does not throw roses to the passage of the officers or sweep the dirt under the carpet in the name of party loyalty. The journalist who exposed torture in Abu Ghraib, was the official negligence in the disaster triggered by Hurricane Katrina, revealed recurring security problems in the global mining and analyzed the casino's financial system after the 2008 crisis was based on principles Similar: distrust the official word, gather information independently and show a reality unknown to the public and hidden for power.
In the United States, the most interesting contemporary journalism, such as the ProPublica is practiced, the Voice of San Diego, The St. Petersburg Times or National Public Radio Cadena, cultivate the virtues of journalism as a civic actor rather than organic member of a party. Neither The Independent and The Guardian in England, other examples of the best journalism today, put the shirt of parties or governments, but often take clear positions (to the left of the political spectrum) over a wide range of topics. That
journalism hold power distance does not mean that officials never hit enter or have convictions and clear positions on certain issues. The difference is to report on the basis of commitment to democratic principles-equal rights, tolerance for diversity, respect for differences of opinion, access to opportunities for expression, accountability, transparency of public resource use, broad participation, or adherence to government of the day and party platforms.
Similarly, the experiences of other democracies show that the "activist journalism" favors the view compared to the data. If we consider the case of the Fox network in the U.S. or most of the English press, we see that the tendency is to ignore data that contradict ideological convictions. It is justified to present biased information to confirm the certainties and rejoice militants allied officials. Critical thinking of journalism is replaced by the militant compliance. When opinion is abundant, scarce original journalism that collects and verifies data promises and policy statements. Analyze information or proprietary research is more expensive than what it says applaud the ruling or opposition.
oppose journalism as public watchdog against "activist journalism" does not mean to assume that the press is effectively autonomous. Around the world, journalism is not an island, but part of complex networks informational, political, and economic. The autonomy of journalism, so celebrated from left to right, is difficult. Even in countries where public broadcasting is underpinned by the principle of independence from political power (as the BBC or the Scandinavian countries), journalism faces daily challenges to maintain margins of independence, especially when reporting on issues affecting lofty political and economic interests. This reality, however, does not justify abandoning the search away from those who make decisions affecting the public. The credibility of journalism lies in cultivating areas of autonomy to report something that someone with power does not want to be known.
Another sensitive issue is the financing of "activist journalism." Who pays for the daily production of news, information and opinion? Here are the options. The choice of the old party newspaper, endangered in the world, was being financed by large political machines and party members. In Argentina, with matches in perpetual crisis and chronic financial difficulties, that possibility does not seem viable. Money from the readers? It is hardly possible. The last decade of free access to Internet news sites confirms that the reading public is rarely willing to pay, even when read religiously and depends on certain means for their daily news diet. We are a large news hungry world, but without interest to pay for the cost of production, even minimum monetary contribution. Another possibility, currently under discussion in the United States and some European democracies, is philanthropy and support of journalism. For now, this does not seem feasible in our country.
The remaining possibilities are the classic ones that have supported financially to the press in Latin America: advertising, personal fortunes and public funds managed by the ruling. If advertising, how are consistent commercial interests in political activism? Does advertising militant? Is capitalism a supporter? If you are the personal fortunes, it is possible to imagine that the individual interests of the magnates did not always match the mystical and militant ideology. And personal wealth invested in the media are prone to economic downturns and political agreements on time.
If public funds are the lifeblood of journalism activist, obviously, this is still a problem and long-standing core of democracy in Argentina: the discretionary use of state money to support the official newspaper and not precisely the journalism that serves the public. Unless you try, as was done with different luck in European democracies (as in the Netherlands), to allocate public funds for partisan forces represented in Parliament to have its own journalism. Such a policy requires a consensus wide between the major parties joined a truly public broadcasting, inclusive and transparent. In a country polarized and fragmented political parties and coalitions that last election, this is an illusion than a reality.
Faced with problems, weak or non-viability of these alternatives for financing, how does one sustain economically the "activist journalism"?
Today, there is no ideal model of journalism. The ideals of objectivity, neutrality and abstract public interest does not have the luster of the past. Touted by American journalism and public broadcasting in English at the beginning of last century, these ideals no longer dominate the journalistic imagination. Currently, there are multiple periods inspired by different principles. The information explosion and commercial pressures on media companies brought great changes in the conception of journalism and encouraged the search for new formulas. In European democracies, living remnants of the ideological tradition of press journalists interested to take away from the games. In the U.S., the moderation of the mainstream media is deafening in contrast to the view cable television. These trends exist in worlds aimed at producing journalistic sensationalism and light information, news faster than sound or relevant to democracy and screaming headlines that capture the attention of the audience.
Within this scenario, any journalism that generates respect inside and outside the newsroom is feathering with militancy in favor of a government or party. This is due to the lingering suspicion that the government militant journalism or mounted on a party platform is willing to throw overboard the information in the name of loyalty and offer a vision of locking more than a broad view of the complex reality contemporary.
journalism always reports from a particular location, not from a utopian Olympus away from the political and moral life of citizens. Recognizing this situation does not mean abandoning the idea that journalism should strive to maintain distance from government and be critical of dogma perpetuated by those who recite their truths.
data are sacrificed when the uninformed opinion dominates and ideological blinders are used to provide information that confirms prior beliefs. To paraphrase Hannah Arendt, freedom of opinion becomes a farce when ignoring the facts on the basis of ideology or power. This situation requires that engage in advocacy journalism to have autonomy, to respect the data, and confront governments and citizens with information hiding, unknown, or refuse to know. This should be the real membership of journalism.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment