The panel:
Arthur Browne - current New York Daily News editorial page editor, former editor for Bloomberg L.P, as well as a Pulitzer Prize winner.
Susan Edgerley - has been working with The New York Times since 1989, currently as the Assistant Managing Editor for career development and reinvention of the newsroom, and a former Metro editor.
Dr. Diane Heith - an Associate Professor of Government and Politics at St. Johns, who holds a Ph.D in Political Science, from Brown University, has authored numerous articles including "“Reaching Women: Soft Media in the 2004 Presidential Election Cycle", and "Footwear, Lipstick and an Orthodox Sabbath: Media Coverage of Non Traditional Candidates."
Mark J. Prendergast - currently an Associate Professor of Journalism at St. Johns University, as well as the ombudsman for Stars and Stripes, holds an MA in Journalism from Columbia University. Prendergast was a former editor of the New York Times for 13 years, and also worked for the Washington Post and the Daily News.
The topic of discussion was the decline of print media, its shift to online news, and its potential effect on democracy.
Browne stated that we're "in danger" with such a decline because information that the government doesn't give up willfully "takes work" and every piece of information we don't get becomes a "slice at democracy."
According to Browne, bloggers' "choice of topics are not serious" lacking "any form of serious reporting" that will be needed to pursue the harder bits of information the public needs, and has a right, to know.
Although that statement may have some merit, it's a dangerous thing to generalize. Yes, there are bloggers that use the domain to discuss nonsensical things, but there are others in fact do some serious reporting. Take Talking Points Memo and Footnoted , two informative blogs that report efficiently and thoroughly informing the public on matters of business and politics. Bloggers consist of a diverse population. In the industry of journalism itself, where some recent graduates from journalism school may find themselves unemployed, others, such as 23-year-old Rebecca Harshbarger have taken reporting into their own hands. She reports internationally, straight from Uganda into her own "Uganda Beat."
Dr. Heith points also points out that in spite of a decline in print media, "democracy will survive" because "we vote, and that's what we do in our democracy", and all that's needed is information.
"How do you know that this information is trustworthy?" Professor Prendergast questions, referring some online news mediums. That credibility is essential in order for citizens to make decisions such as "should we go to war or shouldn't we", he said.
Does that decision really lie in the hand of the citizens? And is print media a completely trustworthy source?
In March 2003, according to AEI Public Opinion Studies, a Pew Research Center poll found 59-percent in favor of taking military action in Iraq, and 38-percent of that 59 said that we should only attack Iraq if our major allies agreed to join.
But what information were the American people basing their decisions on?
Assertions were made by President Bush that Iraq was harboring "weapons of mass destruction." Although in January 2003 "no incriminating weapons [were] found" after UN "inspectors [were] allowed to check any suspicious sites nominated by the US or UK," according to Brian Toohey of The Sun Herald based in Sydney, Australia. Yet the American people were still led to believe, by the government and the media (print included), otherwise.
So is it really a question of the information medium that posses a threat to our democracy? Could these facts only have been unearthed from print-news media sources, or could've an online independent done the same?
Is it the decline of print that is a threat to our democracy?
Or is it is something greater?
No comments:
Post a Comment