Class this past week was all about the Pentagon Papers and the person who leaked them. For those of you who are not familiar with them, they are papers that list political and military involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1967. Now if that is all you knew about them you would say why are they so important? But the details on these papers exposed a couple presidents' in their lies and intentions upsetting many people. The papers were first publicized on the front page of the New York Times. It was not until June 2011 the papers were publicly released again. (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/08/us/08pentagon.html?pagewanted=all)
Daniel Ellsberg, a former government official, was the man who leaked the papers. (http://www.ellsberg.net/bio) He faced charges under the espionage act of 1917, which helped bring his sentence to 155 years in prison. The charges eventually ended up being dropped when irregularities appeared in the governments case. Ellsberg was being called "the most dangerous man in America" and even had a documentary made about him called that. Was what Ellsberg did so bad? Wouldn't you want to know if the leaders of your country were lying to you, especially about issues dealing with war? I think the government should not blatantly lie to the people, cover it up and hide it away, then get mad when somebody finds out and exposes them for their crime. There are certain things that are probably better for the public to not know about for security and safety reasons. But when it comes to things that just affect the President's likelihood of being reelected for another term, it should not hidden from the people!
Did you know that some journalists have evolved into business people? This not only shifts the focus towards money, it also affects the trust and loyalty between citizens and journalists.
Journalists have also become better educated, which gives them the ability to turn journalism into a business. Now in my opinion, I think that is really bad. We all know funding for print media is being redirected for the future since advertising is changing. Journalism needs to find a way to financially stay afloat, but when it turns into more of a business proposition instead of news reporting, it defeats the purpose of journalism altogether. We need to find a solution to financing journalism in a way where it doesn't affect the news. Journalists need to report without an agenda, and I know I have mentioned that before, but it allows the reporters to report the truth without having to please their employers.
Journalists also need to have independence. They need to be free from all politics, demands, and subsidies to reveal the truth to the citizens. Journalists work and report for the people and no one else. It is important for journalists to be the watchdog of the government and to continue doing that. But this still does not solve journalism's financial problem! How are we going to figure out how to get the money for journalism?
Many would think all a journalists needs to do is find out the facts and write them in a story, but there is so much more to it. Journalism has adapted and changed to the new wonders of the world as big as world wars and as common as social media. A fact the group presentation had last week was journalists help define a community in values, goals, villains, and heroes. What the news reports is what the people believe (maybe not so much now) and should rely on for their information. If the news accuses someone as a murderer, the community believes it. Journalism defines everything newsworthy.
Journalism should also never be reported with an agenda. I was able to watch a film directed by George Clooney called "Good Night, and Good Luck" which focuses a lot on the responsibilities of the media. The truth is what should always be reported and statements should be made, when necessary, to back up any claim made in reporting. It is important for journalists to relate to their readers because the public wants to listen to someone they can trust. Edward R. Murrow was that person during the communism scare after World War II. He adapted to the hard times and changed broadcast journalism with his show. (Here is a link to his biography http://www.biography.com/people/edward-r-murrow-9419104.) He crossed the line of reporting to his audience and gave his opinion compromising his job, but he did if for the greater good of the people. He reported the truth and protected his name like any other person would do, except a journalist isn't like any other person. They have a responsibility to stay neutral and unbiased, but lets be honest, no one is un-biased.
This video is a speech Murrow gave emphasizing how reporting the news can so easily be changed into a form of entertainment if we are not careful. Like I said before, there should be no agenda in journalism.
In class this past week we had a guest speaker named Gareth Harding. He's a freelance journalists that believes "the best way of doing communications, is to approach it journalistically." One of the things that stuck with me, was his emphasis on creating and keeping contacts. Contacts will help you get the job, or obtain a story, or get information on news that you would not normally get. Contacts help you succeed in the media business and he said without contacts you will have a hard time getting work as a freelance reporter. (http://garethharding.com/about-me/)
He also said, "you've got to fail in order to succeed." It was his life experiences that affected his life the most, not his assignments. You have to go out and find stories and gain that experience for you to be able to succeed. He made the point that when you fail, and you will fail, you have to keep going. Journalists are people with views and opinions just like anybody else, except their voice is heard by a bigger audience. It is important to take the opinions and views of others about your writing and listen, because they will not always be the same ideas as yours.
It is also important to be "media literate, so that you know the market." (http://www.cmp.ucr.edu/education/programs/digitalstudio/studio_programs/vidkids/medialit.html) It is the reporters job to make sure that they are up to date on all technology and news circulating through the world. One must know what the world is interested at the time to sell a story or captivate the audience. One must also take risks. Big risks come with great rewards and is important for all future reporters to realize.
Last week we had a presentation on the JFK assassination and how it affected journalism. I had no idea the actual footage was played on TV for all to see. ( http://www.youtube.com/watchv=iU83R7rpXQY) Imagine seeing the President now being assassinated and the footage being aired for the world to see! That would never happen! This tragedy was what started to sensor what the mass audiences were able to view by the media. The JFK assassination was a shock to everybody. Not one person knew more than the other on the situation consuming the minds of every American. One of the presenters in class even said a reporter called the White House to get a statement/ update on the President's condition/situation and they said something along the lines of "we know as much as you do, we were waiting to find out by you." Since then the news has been the place for one to gain knowledge and information happening in the world. Journalists and news reporters are responsible to prepare this news enough to be interesting, but not too much where it is too graphic or impersonal. There are now guidelines for appropriate content, and it is apart of journalism for good.
Hey bloggers! Since class on Wednesday I have been wondering what classifies a person as a journalist. Is a random person who records bombings in Syria a journalist? Or even a teenager who captures Beyonce being pulled off a stage in Brazil? The news and captivating stories are what bring the mass audience to the edge of their seats, so are these people providing breaking news? I have come to learn these people as citizen journalists (http://journalism.about.com/od/citizenjournalism/a/witizen.htm) and they basically report what the professionals would be doing. Anyone could be a citizen journalist, but not anyone can be a professional journalist who provides unbiased information to share with the audience.
One of the Six "C's" of Journalism I appreciate is Constitutional. The first amendments states "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of Speech or of the Press."Without the Bill of Rights journalists would not have the ability to keep the government "in check" and by "in check" I mean afraid to make any radical decisions without the peoples consent. I like the reading we had about journalists being the watchdog of the government, and how they mirror whatever the government is doing. With this system at hand, American people get the stories and information about the people leading them without being falsely misguided. The laws we have as American people were truly inspired by the founding fathers. Journalism is all apart of this system and without it, where would the government be today?
Class this past week was all about the Pentagon Papers and the person who leaked them. For those of you who are not familiar with them, they are papers that list political and military involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1967. Now if that is all you knew about them you would say why are they so important? But the details on these papers exposed a couple presidents' in their lies and intentions upsetting many people. The papers were first publicized on the front page of the New York Times. It was not until June 2011 the papers were publicly released again. (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/08/us/08pentagon.html?pagewanted=all)
Daniel Ellsberg, a former government official, was the man who leaked the papers. (http://www.ellsberg.net/bio) He faced charges under the espionage act of 1917, which helped bring his sentence to 155 years in prison. The charges eventually ended up being dropped when irregularities appeared in the governments case. Ellsberg was being called "the most dangerous man in America" and even had a documentary made about him called that. Was what Ellsberg did so bad? Wouldn't you want to know if the leaders of your country were lying to you, especially about issues dealing with war? I think the government should not blatantly lie to the people, cover it up and hide it away, then get mad when somebody finds out and exposes them for their crime. There are certain things that are probably better for the public to not know about for security and safety reasons. But when it comes to things that just affect the President's likelihood of being reelected for another term, it should not hidden from the people! 
