Category: Good Writing

Book Review: The Elements of Journalism

Book Review, Good Writing, Grad School

151522For my J800 class I was assigned to read Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel’s The Elements of Journalism – What Newspeople Should Know and the Public Should Expect. I finished it in two days, it was a quick read, but an important one. Just in these first few days of classes, I’ve been reminded how important it is for the public to build a relationship with a journalist based on transparency and verification of information. If no one trusts what you say, you can’t be a journalist. Its that simple.

So what are the “Elements of Journalism?”
(Taken directly out of the book)

1. The primary purpose of journalism is to provide citizens with the information they need to be free and self-governing.
2. Journalism’s first obligation is to the truth.
3. Journalism’s first loyalty is to citizens.
4. The essence of journalism is a discipline of verification.
5. Journalists must maintain an independence from those they cover.
6. Journalists must serve as an independent monitor of power.
7. Journalism must provide a forum for public criticism and compromise.
8. Journalists must make the significant interesting and relevant.
9. Journalists should keep the news comprehensive and in proportion.
10. Journalists have an obligation to exercise their personal conscience.

Things to think about as I start to settle into my chosen profession…

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.