Dank_Journey_of_Journalism_Final

docx

School

New York University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

MISC

Subject

Arts Humanities

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

10

Uploaded by erikaforcher

Report
Dawn Dank 12/11/21 dtd7797@nyu.edu The Journey of Journalism Final Question 1(a): cultural movement In the twentieth century, writers who wrote with and utilized pre-World War I reform and exposé writing emerged. They were famous for providing extremely detailed, accurate, and unbiased accounts of various political, social, or economic examples of corruption within society. This movement of journalists, known as the “muckrakers” emerged following the introduction of yellow journalism in the late 19th century. They helped raise the appetite of Americans for investigative news and media. These journalists differed from those of the past because a large portion of their work was primarily scandal based. The main switch from “personal” and “yellow journalism” to Muckraking was that Muckrakers did not have the same lousy and negative association due to the tactics they employed. This cultural movement, led by remarkable journalists like Ida Tarbell and Lincoln Steffens, wrote articles on trusts, the municipal government, and labor. Their work, which resulted in improved social and environmental conditions within the United States, made them a very necessary and impactful social movement. Ida Tarbell, as a great example, exposed unfair practices in the Standard Oil Company, showing how writers could uncover unfair practices by monopolies and in return protect the American public. The work of Muckrakers also had immediate effects on society as they were the mass media of the time. They are given credit for providing the spark that would ignite the progressive movement. The importance of the press and media in forming progressive action, which they highlighted, remains today. Movements such as “Me Too” and “Black Lives Matter” are only two of the many modern-day examples of this. During their time of popularity, the primary source of news was newspapers and magazines. After publishing their work within the paper, they would usually release books, two examples being Upton 1
Sinclair’s “The Jungle” and Lincoln Steffens’s “The Shame of Cities”. Lincoln investigated municipal governments and their corruption and Upton exposed the horrid working conditions and sanitary issues within the meatpacking industry. Both of their work gave fuel to the progressive movement and Upton’s resulted in the passing of legislation which is still in effect today. Muckrakers also used photos within their work, which captured the eyes of their audience and showed the deplorable conditions they uncovered. They were highly successful in impacting how we obtain and read the news today. They exposed the truth and strived to improve social conditions, which motivated individuals by showing them their potential. Muckrakers famously wrote for large scale magazines, and some were closely related to the government, seen with Baker and President Roosevelt. They had the power to take minor hidden issues and convert them into national interests. This gave America its current “welfare mentality”, a strive to have programs to help those who cannot support themselves and to correct the wrongs which we see within our society . Despite their many benefits, the work of Muckrakers was not all positive; it also resulted in limitations in the news and media. They were relentless in exposing confidential information, but the boundary needed would lie between what should be shared and what should remain private information. By attacking individuals, which is often apparent in modern pop-culture magazines, investigative journalists framed very personal issues publicly, which is now frowned upon although popular with the curious public. Journalists may not have the same urgent matters to uncover, such as corruption and societal issues, but the exact strategies have lasted centuries and still appear today. The Muckrakers may have experienced a demise recently, but their effect lies in their role in history. They opened the floor for a progressive era of social reform, highlighted the possible relationship between the government and the press, and demonstrated to the public the role that the media could play in inspiring societal change. Question 1(b): technological development 2
Before technology, it was a lengthy and challenging process to send messages to distant places. The main sources of news and media that were available had to be printed and copied. These newspapers and magazines had to be sent and delivered to faraway places, and the process of making them was not simple. After something would occur, it would take weeks or even months to receive information due to travel, resulting in a delay and lack of immediacy. This made it difficult for populations to communicate, stay connected, and develop national culture and identity. Before the inventions of later decades, the world was isolated from its geography. The way people received information was the same as when the printing press was first invented years prior. However, this was forever changed in the 18th and 19th centuries with the invention of the telegraph. The telegraph used Samuel Morse’s creation, the Morse code, to convey messages. This worked with individuals who would shortly stop the flow of electricity through communication wires. This advancement, among some others, was arguably one of the most significant historical developments in communication. With the telegraph, information flowed almost immediately; a message from New York to Europe could be received in mere minutes. For the first time, the world became far more connected and smaller, and it was easier to receive relevant news. The telegraph changed how humans would convey and tell the information. After its introduction, other primary sources of communication emerged in the following decades, including the radio, telephone, email, and the internet. Although the significance of the telegraph lies heavily in its role as a steppingstone to future developments in technology and communication, one of its more immediate effects was its impact on businesses, social life, and politics. There were both positives and negatives to the telegraph in this way. It helped lessen the likelihood of antagonistic relationships between nations due to increased communication. Countries could communicate more effortlessly, and it would become much more challenging to have misinterpretations. Nations could reach deals and agreements, and collaboration could take place. However, there were also some unpredicted effects. One of these was the beginning of the end of newspapers. Following the introduction of wired telegraphs, what would soon follow would be the development of the radio, referred to as the “wireless telegraph”. The written newspaper was far less attractive to the public following these 3
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
later inventions. A figure from Pew Research presents this decline in the circulation of newspapers, and the amount has almost halved from being over 40 million to only 25 million today over the course of just a couple decades. With the later production of new communication sources, the people could access immediate news and information, which had no comparable substitutes. The telegraph made the US far more united, developing a shared mind and identity. Without the creation of the telegraph, there would have been no development of non-news media. The videos we use to educate ourselves, the internet we use to obtain information, and news channels that provide worldwide information and events would not exist. When we look at all the means of communication and media sources readily available at our fingertips, it is easy to see the tremendous beneficial impact that the telegraph has had on the news and the spread of information. Question 1(c): historical event There have been many historical events which have greatly influenced the news and how information is obtained and spread. We started our journey with printed news and difficulties in sharing messages across geological barriers, however, with technological developments and industrialization, the media industry began to change forms. This is demonstrated in various events which have occurred throughout American history, and one of arguably the most significant of these events was the beginning of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s “fireside chats”. When Roosevelt became president, the golden age of the radio had already begun. Radio had begun overtaking other media as a main source of information and this was largely due to the lack of money and skills needed to partake in hearing the news vs. reading it. Roosevelt, unlike the many presidents before him, was presented with the amazing opportunity to speak to the public and have his own words not filtered through the press, there was no room for modified or misquoted information. He became the first president to harness the radio and its immense political power. When he entered office in 1933, he was left with the fears associated with the fall of the American economy, and he needed to urge 4
American citizens to resist removing all their money from the banks. Only about a week after entering office, he had his first communication using the radio. Within this speech, and his later chats with the American public, he would disclose his own ideas and actions he would be taking in response to first the great depression and later the World War directly to the American people. By doing so on a regular basis, eventually being every 3 months, he believed that he would be able to effectively earn their support and complete trust. After his first radio speech, his “fireside chats” became imperative in fulfilling his New Deal agenda. The talks made by Roosevelt were unprecedented and were both extremely popular and comforting to the American public, it completely transformed the potential roles of a president and the government’s outreach was forever expanded. For the first time, presidents could speak directly to the electorate and forge a bond that increased national spirit. These chats, having many positive immediate results, led to later developments for American presidents. These chats changed the way leaders could convey news to the public, there was more emotion and unfiltered information. They modified the relationship between the public and the president as well as the president and the news. The public had increased power and could choose more authentic candidates and sources of information. More importantly however, this impacted the bond that could be shared between the people and their leader. People felt highly connected to Roosevelt as he emerged as a figure for everyone. It is undeniable that these chats proved to be a large benefit for many. Today we see later effects of this work. A quicker result was the emergence of presidential elections on TV with the debate with Eisenhower and the full election of Kennedy and Nixon. Later, this continued with the development of social media and the election of President Obama. Obama was the first president to be seen with social media. Overall, the chats of Roosevelt and the introduction of the media into the governmental sphere has had many benefits. It allowed those in charge to forge a strong relationship with the American people, provided a more unfiltered way to share agendas, and gave individuals a heightened sense of trust when they were in times of great need. 5
Question 2: The introduction of social media has played a crucial role in manipulating how news is formed and dispersed. For the first time, it is possible for news providers to both publish their information and obtain sources for their reports from the same location. However, how reliable is social media? Although social media has now become the most popular source of news, the time in which people spend reading news stories has decreased significantly. People nowadays only skim the title and read briefly before moving on to other information. Multiple papers have published data on this. For example, A great article by Slate analyzes the amount of people who still scroll and read an article on the internet, and the amount is shocking. Most visitors simply did not scroll, but those who did only managed to get through 50% of the content. This is problematic, especially if there is a need to convey important and necessary information to the public. People simply lose focus in reading, and the continuous use of social media and a constant supply of information only worsens these issues. This is primarily why articles are pushed to post more often and to use more eye-catching titles to attract a portion of their reader’s time. Additionally, social media platforms simultaneously have complete control over which data is accessible, and the desire for attention and shares has contributed to many fake news sites. These sites, which target the individuals who only read the headlines, have made it far more challenging to come by authentic news. This can be harmful when we need to alert the public of important information because the share of space for actual content decreases. There is no question that the cons of social media and the news industry outweigh the pros which can be derived. However, despite these drawbacks, I still believe that there are great benefits from this unlimited access to information. One can search up different types of information for educational purposes and learn about whatever they choose whether it is about politics, animals, or culture. However, because there are no real controls on who can publish on the internet, the percentage of factual information is less than we are led to believe. We have no real way of verifying who releases the information we consume, which is troublesome in a world of fearmongering and conspiracies. 6
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
The issue that I have found to be the most troubling with the access to information on the internet is when it is found and utilized by reporters. The rush to publish is not helpful either. These practices take the original purpose of the news, inform and uncover, and stretch it to a point that it is excessive and simply not helpful. The 24-hour news cycle creates insane levels of competition amongst media organizations for a share of attention. This along with a high demand for profit has led to a serious decline in the formerly high standards of journalists. With an increased rush to publish, journalists are far less likely to verify the information they are utilizing, and many sources may release contradicting information. I propose that it serves no real common benefit other than entertainment to release such false information just for a share of the public’s attention, especially if a reporter or journalist is not taking adequate steps to verify the information they publish. It is simultaneously not beneficial when the number of people who claim the news is accurate has decreased from about 55% to 29%. There have been many related consequences to inauthentic news being released; some individuals have had their careers wholly destroyed, the public has been sent into terror, and threats of conflicts between nations have been suggested multiple times. An example of this was seen when Pakistan threatened nuclear war against Israel after a social media post claimed they would attack Pakistan if they sent troops into Syria. Other than militaristic consequences, the term “cancelled” is one which has been ingrained into the public. If any misstep or offensive comment is raised by an individual, someone’s life can be ended and their career revoked. For these reasons, considering “The Social Media Upheaval”, I humor the idea that we should require some form of intervention. Multiple suggestions appear in the text; they vary from smaller organizations’ regulations to more extensive actions of breaking up monster corporations to serve the public interest. I believe that the first is much more feasible given the current situation of the United States Media. In his work, Prof. Reynold suggests that we increase scrutiny of both users and content, and he also wants transparency in algorithms and no anonymity online. However, these are not guaranteed to be successful. This is primarily why he moves to anti-trust regulations in the later section of the book. 7
I am fully convinced that all media platforms need to be held accountable for what is published on their sites. While it might be challenging to regulate, there are many negative results of not doing so— some of these being the spread of panic, acts of violence that can emerge, and lies. Anti-trust regulations are also something I agree with. Companies like Facebook grew on lies of privacy, and we are now aware of the data harvesting and other actions which violate this and now take place. Not only this but monopoly-like companies such as Facebook present barriers to entry for different social media platforms. Having all relevant control and information from one company serves no benefit to the American public. Facebook seeks to acquire entrants to their market, takes place in data harvesting, and their work to gain more market share makes them considerably like older monopolies. There is no way for modern society to ignore emerging issues in trust and privacy when they pose such threats to the sharing of information, and not to mention mental and social health. While social media has given us countless benefits and made the world considerably more open and smaller, we need to rethink our usage and how it can be modified to ensure protection and Genuity are extended to the totality of the world’s population. Question 3: A healthy and effective government relies on the telling of information. Giving citizens the ability to scrutinize their government and arm themselves with the truth is valuable in maintaining such an institution. However, a steady decay in truth has developed in the 50 years, resulting in mistrust in media and news. One of the most significant reasons for this decline is economic and technological developments within the news industry itself. There were local newspapers and a limited variety of news and radio stations to provide a well-varied display of information in the past. Regulations present made it easy for individuals to differentiate between news, opinion, and entertainment. However, the introduction of talk radio was where we first started seeing blurred lines between different media types. Radio talk shows and controversial hosts became popular, as new individuals gave underrepresented populations 8
something appealing and relatable. This appeared within this decade with Donald Trump, who struck a nerve with Americans, ultimately resulting in his presidency. While this had some benefits, research and surveys from various organization including Pew Research have shown that trust in the media has declined sharply, especially amongst republicans. Despite these externalities the internet and social media, which played a prominent role in Trump’s victory, gave the nation gossip alongside free and cheaper advertising sources. Whenever the internet successfully conveyed truthful information, people began to believe in it as reliable, which proved to be damaging for journalists and caused confusion between which information was trustworthy. With the cries of “fake news” from Donald Trump and the rushes to release information to meet deadlines, reliability plummets. Some examples include the “Pizza gate” scandal of the Clintons, which claimed they used a pizza shop for the front of a sex ring and the story which claimed Obama signed an executive order to ban the pledge of allegiance in US schools. Sadly, those examples are on the less dangerous side of the scale. There have been times when nations and world leaders made false statements that never existed because statements were crafted by random individuals. These issues need to be dealt with careful consideration as they have potentially lethal results. The main goal of these news and social media forms is to grab as much attention as possible and distract. It is a tool to divert public attention. We need to prevent future unreliable sources and develop stricter standards to prevent further confusion, prevent conflict, and maintain the foundations of government and democracy. 9
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Work Cited: Manjoo, Farhad. “You Won't Finish This Article.” Slate Magazine , Slate, 6 June 2013, https://slate.com/technology/2013/06/how-people-read-online-why-you-wont-finish-this- article.html Gottfried, Jeffrey, and Jacob Liedke. “Partisan Divides in Media Trust Widen, Driven by a Decline among Republicans.” Pew Research Center , Pew Research Center, 30 Aug. 2021, https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/08/30/partisan-divides-in-media-trust-widen-driven- by-a-decline-among-republicans/ . Pew Research Center. (2021, July 16). Trends and facts on newspapers: State of the news media . Pew Research Center's Journalism Project. Retrieved December 15, 2021, from https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/fact-sheet/newspapers/ Pew Research Center. (2020, May 30). Press accuracy rating hits Two Decade low . Pew Research Center - U.S. Politics & Policy. Retrieved December 15, 2021, from https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2009/09/13/press-accuracy-rating-hits-two-decade-low/ Reynolds, G. H. (2019). The social media upheaval . Encounter Books. 10