Category: State of Journalism

Discovery Channel Hostage Situation

State of Journalism

Yesterday a man armed with guns and bombs held people captive at the Discovery Channel’s offices in Maryland, before he was shot by police. He was shot and killed after a three hour standoff, when according to police, it seemed like he was going to harm the three men he was holding hostage.

The Washington Post’s article on the shooting:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/01/AR2010090103701.html

Among the shooters demands was for the Discovery Channel to alter their programming to do more to improve global warming. Now, I believe in global warming and society’s negative impact on our natural environments, but blaming the Discovery Channel for not doing enough? Really? What about government and industry? If the hostage-taker had lived, I’d be interested to see if he mounted a mental defense because its basically madness.

The Discovery Channel isn’t a news source, they feature science-related programming (some of which is about global warming) but their purpose is to entertain while educating on a variety of topics. The company is a part of the entertainment business. Its like getting mad at Nickelodeon for not going enough to stop domestic violence just because their programs cater to children and families.

Even if the Discovery Channel wanted to do a plethora of news-based programs on global warming, who is to say that anyone would watch them? Part of what I do as a science writer is try to make science appealing to the public, and trust me its not easy to compete with celebrity gossip and the latest sports scores. Global warming is particularly difficult to report on, because the very nature of science and the evidence for a warming trend is open to change. Try to convince the masses that you are absolutely sure that something is happening, when new findings constantly emerge, and well-credentialed “experts” openly disagree on the topic. I think the challenge that has been presented to reporters is to make global warming stories pressing and moving, so the public wants to hear about it.

On Personal Passions and Journalistic Detachment

Good Writing, Public Perceptions, State of Journalism

An interesting post from Andrew Revkin’s blog DotEarth for the New York Times, talking about how journalists can reconcile the issues they are personally passionate about with the need to be detached and well-rounded in their reporting.

The post is taken from a 2005 speech given by Revkin (when he was still a full-time Times reporter, instead of a blogger) but I think it drives home some interesting points about being a journalist.

Writers are people first, and journalists second but a requirement of the profession is not to insert your own voice into the reporting, unless you are a columnist. Writers have to conform to the style of whatever publication they work for. This can dilute their own voice even more as they adapt to specific structure and standards.

I also found Revkin’s thoughts on how science writers approach content interesting. There is no doubt that it can be difficult to show a new scientific finding in the greater context of all the findings that have occurred before it. I think science writers need to find a balance between skill and instinct that informs how to explain an issue, something that only comes with experience.

Good Thing I Didn’t Choose Colorado

Grad School, State of Journalism,

When I was narrowing down programs and trying to choose which Grad School I wanted to attend I was split between the University of Wisconsin Madison and the University of Colorado at Boulder. Michigan State’s Knight Center for Environmental Journalism was a big draw, but I didn’t get the acceptance letter until just days before I had to make a decision, making a visit to the school impossible, so that pretty much counted them out. I chose UW because I loved Madison, and I felt like I would fit into the community much better than I would in Colorado.

As it turns out, its a good thing I chose UW instead of Colorado because CU Boulder is closing their Journalism school. It would have been incredibly unfortunate to be stuck there with the program completely restructuring. Most likely, I would have ended up with a graduate degree in something that didn’t reflect my actual interests and job goals (probably information studies or multi media something or another.) I guess I dodged the proverbial bullet on that one.

Thanks to my Mom for this interesting article on the closing and how journalism, despite the massive loss of revenue in recent years, is expanding at an enormous rate due to the rise of new technologies. Universities need to find a way to fit the ever changing role of journalism into their programs.

One quote from the article that I just want to highlight is from David Hazinski an associate professor at the University of Georgia’s Journalism and Mass Communication program. Essentially he’s explaining why journalists still have a role to play in a society that has been bombarded by instant opinion and commentary through blogs, twitter, etc. People trained in the technology are not the same as people who are trained in telling the story.

“Journalism isn’t hardware. It is content and context. Someone is still going to have to go to that fire and shoot some video, interview the mayor, and analyze that stock report. Someone is still going to have to package it, if for no other reason than to save audiences time. Writing, interviewing, editing, and working under pressure will still be needed skills. Ethics and standards will become even more important as the sea of opinion grows deeper. The content and context will be distributed over many platforms but someone has to be at the top of the information food chain. Those people will be skilled journalists, not technicians.”