Just Around the Corner.

The world is so full of opportunity, and there’s a million and one ways in which you can do something. With a dash of creativity and a stroke of luck, anyone can make something new happen. This applies to the world of journalism. There are so many different kinds of journalists out there, and journalism can operate on so many different platforms. You don’t need a degree to be a journalist, even though that’s what I’m doing right now. Anyone can pick up a camera or start writing. All you need is an issue and some passion.

Our guest lecturer today, Steve Molks, was talking to us about his story as a journalist, and all the different kinds of journalism out there. There are so many different types of journalism, and a lot of it is interconnected, and it can get pretty overwhelming thinking about it all. But it got me thinking about exactly what kind of journalist I want to be, and the kinds of things I want to write. Now, I’m not naïve. I know that sometimes you just get given a story, and that sometimes there isn’t much choice in the matter. But every journalist should have their own style and their own voice. Every journalist should have something unique about them.  I want to have that dash of creativity and luck, and be a journalist that stands out a little and thinks outside the box.

If I’m completely honest, I have no idea exactly what kind of journalist I want to be yet, but I’m okay with that. I’m more than happy to dabble in a few different styles until I find my niche. Steve Molks was talking about what he does, I was thinking about what I want to do. But something important that I took away from it is that you don’t need to be writing for a newspaper or magazine to be a journalist. The online world is changing the face of journalism, and is making it much more accessible to the public. It’s easier than ever to get your thoughts out there, and find other people who think the way you do, and also people who don’t. Because the world can’t just be all one sided, can it?

The fact of the matter is I don’t have to wait until the end of my degree to be a journalist, and I can be any kind of journalist I want. Because the world really is full of opportunity, and there’s always room for something new. 

Detective Work.

Everyone wants to be remembered, and some events will go down in history, never to be forgotten. A quote from our first lecture said that ‘journalism is the first rough draft of history’, and I think it’s true. Through the news, events are recorded and remembered. But in an increasingly fast-paced world, particularly with the birth of online news and the 24 hour news cycle, news seems to be just getting churned out, with little being remembered. Stories get lost in the ocean of news that is presented to us every day, and it seems like journalists just don’t have the time to delve deeper into their stories, because people want information now. But some of the best, most memorable pieces of journalism have been the result of months and years of work, with journalists devoting themselves to digging deeper and finding out the truth. That’s what investigative journalism is all about: getting to the bottom of a story, and finding out the truth.

One of the most important jobs of the media is to hold the powerful to account. Journalism has the ability to reveal massive scandals and wrongdoings, and that’s a big part of what investigative journalism is about. Journalists work as ‘custodians of conscience’, and investigative journalists in particular fall into this category. Investigative journalism is all about exposure, and bringing to light some of the things that are happening in society. The media brings certain issues to the public’s attention, and investigative journalism goes beyond the straight news, and looks for a deeper story. Its news that’s been well researched and well thought out, with journalists investing something of themselves into bringing the truth to light.

You could be forgiven for believing that this kind of journalism is dying, however. With increasing pressure on newsrooms to get the news out fast, journalists have less and less time to probe into the deeper issues that hide behind the surface of a story. And the simple fact that newsrooms are getting smaller and journalists have just got to do more doesn’t help either. Chances are that the six o’clock news won’t have much in the way of investigative journalism, and online news is all about getting the information out first, rather than getting in-depth into an issue. But investigative journalism still does exist. The Global Mail and Australian Story are just two examples of local investigative journalism. The truth is, people still have curiosity, and a desire to find out what’s really going on. And as long as this exists, investigative journalism will survive. And now more than ever investigative journalism stories stand out against the regular news stories churned out by the hundred in newsrooms every day. Investigative journalism has the potential to make history, and to be remembered. So maybe spending a little more time diving into a story is worth it after all.

The Reality of Reality.

Everyone has a different way of seeing the world. The way we look at reality is shaped by our experiences, our culture, our friends, our family and even our personality. But our perception of reality is also shaped by another thing: the media. The media don’t just report on the world around us; they filter and shape it, making certain issues more or less important. This, in turn, changes the way we look at things, because it changes our focus. This is one of the media’s favourite things: agenda setting.

Agenda setting is all about how the importance the media puts on an issue will impact on the importance society places on it. The simple fact of the matter is that if an issue isn’t in the news, chances are we won’t care about it that much. Agenda setting has two levels. The first is that the media suggests what the public should focus on through coverage. The second is that the media suggests how people should think about an issue. Both can be a little disturbing, when you think about it. The media has the power to tell us what to think about, and sometimes even how to think about it. So are we all just on the way to becoming little media drones, seeing the world exactly the way they want us to see it?

The short answer is no. Agenda setting isn’t all about turning us into Rupert Murdoch robots. Agenda setting feeds off news values, and it needs to exist to some extent, or we’d be being bombarded with endless amounts of news 24/7. People do need to think about the news they hear, however.  You can’t believe everything you see and hear in the media, and people should always stop and ask questions about what they’re being told.

The truth is that to some extent, the media is always going to affect how we see the world. If an issue is big in the news, chances are we’ll be thinking and talking about it. And that isn’t necessarily a bad thing: news can open up our eyes to issues we didn’t know were happening before. But the flip side to this is that there’s a hell of a lot of important issues that aren’t given prominence in the media that deserve to be thought and talked about too. As for the other part of agenda setting, the part about changing the way we think about an issue, that’s where we need to be really careful. Because if we just accept everything we hear, we’re facing becoming little media drones. But thinking is the antidote to letting agenda setting shape our realities without our consent. So start thinking about the way you see the world, and what’s shaping it. And make sure you’re seeing your world the way you want to, not how someone else told you to. 

What's Your Value?

Values are funny things. When you ask someone what their values are, there tends to be a lot of umming and ahhing while they try to put it into words. Everyone has values, but we rarely stop and think about what they actually are. Values tend to be those intrinsic things that seem to be buried deep down inside of us, things that we just have. But values are relative, cultural things, and we weren’t born with them. Everyone has different values, and this rule doesn’t stop at news outlets. They have values too.

News values, however, vary slightly from the values held by people. Whereas a person’s values tend to be based upon what we see as important in life, news values are all about what makes news newsworthy. Exactly what factors make stories newsworthy is a topic of debate, with people of all different ages and from all different places trying to come up with ‘the list’ of news values. A perfect list, however, is impossible, because news values vary across countries, states, and even news outlets. The news values of ABC and Channel 9 are likely to be different, just as the news values in Australia are likely to be different to the news values in China. So how do we know what makes good news?

Despite all these differences, some news values are pretty universal. The idea of ‘if it bleeds it leads’ and ‘if it’s local it leads’ is seen across the world, with news of disasters, death and tragedy taking priority in the news. Proximity is also a big one. People want to hear about things that are close to home and that affect them, and so stories that are close geographically tend to get more news space too. There are lots of other factors, including currency, uniqueness, simplicity, exclusivity and size, plus a whole host of others that all change depending on where you are and what outlet you work for.

News values, however, aren’t hard and fast rules. Just like the values held by people, journalists often just have a sense for what makes news worthy, and for what their news values are. They don’t often think about it, and I dare say that if you asked a journalist exactly what their news values are there’d be a bit of umming and ahhing as well. But news values are important to understand, even if they are a bit illusive, and nobody can make ‘the list’. Everyone has news values, just like everyone has values.  And maybe it’d be worth doing some umming and ahhing and figuring out exactly what they are. 

A Thousand Shades of Grey.

We don’t live in a world of black and white. We live in a world made up of a thousand different colours and shades. We live in a world where lines blur, and the difference between right and wrong isn’t always as clear cut as it should be. Sometimes knowing what’s right isn’t as straightforward as picking between two options. The reality is that sometimes there are a million different shades of right and wrong to choose between, and the line isn’t always that easy to see.

Ethics play a big part in our lives, and they’re also crucial to the world of journalism. Journalism’s a profession that, thanks at least in part to a certain Mr Murdoch, often receives a lot of flak for being unethical, and for going about things and getting information in the wrong way. In our lecture this week, however, we learnt that journalists can actually be an ethical bunch, and that’s definitely the kind of journalist I want to be.

Being ethical, however, isn’t as easy as it sounds. Ethics is often about choosing between a bad and a very bad outcome, and different people see different outcomes as more or less ethical. Ethics isn’t black and white, and there are many different approaches. Some believe in deontology, which says that you do the right thing by following the rules. But what about when the rules are wrong? It used to be a rule that black people couldn’t even drink from the same water fountains as white people, let alone go to the same school or earn the same wages. That rule isn’t ethical at all. Following the book doesn’t necessarily make you ethical, as some rules need to be broken.

Others believe in consequentialism, where the ends justify the means. This can be a very dangerous guideline though, as some horrific things have been done throughout history in order to achieve some end. Sometimes the price really does outweigh the reward you get, and often that reward only benefits a certain group of people. And there isn’t anything ethical about making others suffer for the sake of the betterment of a single group.

The last form of ethics theory is virtue. This bases itself on intrinsic values, and the belief that we all have the potential to have good character traits inside of us, and that these will guide us through life. This is a wonderful thing to believe in, but the truth is that some people just don’t listen to that little voice inside their heads. So we can’t really rely on people’s good character to make ethical decisions all the time either.

How do you make an ethical choice then, when no one way of going about it is always correct? Companies make ethics guides, philosophers and thinkers debate about it, but no one has the answer. So perhaps all we can do is trust our instincts, and pick the choice that lies behind one of those thousands of shades of options. No, you won’t always pick the prefect shade. People mess up all the time. But by thinking about other people, and about how our actions will have an impact on them, we might just get a little closer to that golden ethical colour. 

Curiosity and Cats.

Curiosity is a marvellous thing. People find out about the most interesting things and places just by being a little curious. Being a little inquisitive makes life interesting, and people love finding out new things. Curiosity may have killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back. If people weren’t a little curious, the world would never get anywhere.

In the world of journalism, public media is kind of like that. The ABC is famous for its news analysis and current affairs programs, and public media stations are often seen as the place to go for some good, in-depth analysis. In contrast to commercial media’s tendency to be about shocks and thrills, public media tends to be a bit more serious and factual. Public media is kind of like the textbook of the news world, whereas commercial media is the magazine.  The news is a bit more about facts, and a bit less about fun.

The problem comes, however, when this just isn’t the kind of thing people want to watch. Because the truth is, very few people would read a textbook over a magazine. Public media might be deeper, but commercial media looks like more fun. Sometimes people just want light and fluffy, easy to digest things.

So why does public media stick around? Who but old, boring people watch it? In today’s fast paced world, people don’t seem to have time to sit down and really dive into issues. But public media offers something that commercial media, generally, doesn’t. Investigative journalism, the kind that dives right in and makes people think, is everywhere on the ABC. Robert Richter said that public media is the “last bastion of long-form investigative journalism”, and I think it’s true. Public media doesn’t have to think about its shareholders, or making a profit. It has to think about following people's curiosity, and making really good news.

This, I think, is a big part of why public media sticks around. Because people are curious, and they want to go deeper into the bigger issues. Sure, public media isn’t prefect. It’s got a lot of problems to face, and keeping up with the popularity of commercial media is no small challenge. But public media offers something that no one else does, and in order for the world to keep working properly, its needs to stay.

Money Money Money.

Money makes the world go round. Underneath so many things lies the world’s most sort-after substance: money. Media is no exception to this rule. Commercial media rules the media production world, with public media taking up only a very small portion. I say media, you say Rupert Murdoch. The news isn’t just about facts; it’s about profit too.

Commercial media makes its money off just that: commercials. It sells ‘eyes and ears’ to advertisers, and the more popular the show, the more expensive the ad spaces will be. This all sounds just dandy in theory, but in practice, it’s not quite as nice. In order for shows to be popular and to get more viewers, commercial media can be tempted to sensationalise news, and make it more about entertainment and less about facts. Because the fact of the matter is that shocking things sell, and at the end of the day, commercial media is just another business. If it stops making money, it disappears.

But what does this mean for news? Is the news going to have to get dumber and dumber, just so that it can keep going and make a profit? With the rise of web 3.0 advertisers are able to reach much more specific demographics, and companies are beginning to invest in other things than television commercials. Commercial media is having to work harder than ever to make a living. And when the desire to please overtakes the responsibilities of the media in a democracy, things start getting scary. 

So what’s poor old commercial media going to do? As we were asked in our lecture today, can it really deliver on both commercial and social functions? Or does one get sacrificed at the expense of another? And what are we journalists meant to do? Should we continue to write good news and face the possibility of one day living on the streets, or do we sell our souls, and pens, to the mighty dollar? Is the internet the saviour of journalism? Nobody knows all the answers, and it’s a scary world out there, but it’s also exciting. Media is changing, and it’s at a pivotal point in its history. Money may make the world go round, but it’s journalists that tell us about it, which makes me think that they’re here to stay. 

Captain of My Planet.

To some extent, we all live in our own little worlds. Granted, some of us are more off-with-the-fairies than others, and I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t always have both feet on the ground. But our little worlds, the way we see things, shape our worldview, and the way we see others. All too often though we get comfortable there, because things are nice and familiar and normal and right. We hold on tight to our little slice of reality, and bite back fiercely at anyone who dares to question or try and change it. Slowly though, and I think a little scarily, we can become close-minded. Our little worlds stop growing, and our worldviews stay set.

In my lecture this week, which took place in the comfort of my own bed, I listened to Richard Fidler and Steve Austin talk about radio. Each of them talked about their experiences as radio hosts, and about the kinds of things you need to do on radio. But something that struck me was the idea that radio, through conversation, allows us to see into other people’s lives, and into their little worlds. Listening to other people’s stories tells us so much about the world around us, and can open our eyes to different ways of seeing things. But sometimes we close our ears to other people, because we don’t like what they’re saying, or we don’t agree with them.

Radio is one of the oldest media forms, and you’d think it might be on a decline by now. And granted, people don’t tend to huddle around the radio any more to get their nightly news. But people still listen to the radio, whether they’re in the car on the way to work, doing something at home or most recently, through podcasts. Steve Austen said that sometimes you just have to “talk less, and listen more” and  radio allows us to do that. We get to sit back and listen to what others have to say, get a little slice of their world, and compare it with our own.

Richard Fidler said something very interesting. He said to “be open-minded. Expose yourself... to thoughts and ideas you don’t agree with…try and expand your worldview as much as possible.” I think this is a challenge worth trying. Listen to the radio, dive into a book, and ask questions. Try and see inside other people’s little worlds, and expand yours. Because when it comes to worldviews, the bigger the better. Don’t get me wrong: you don’t have to agree with everyone. Just try and see the world from a different point of view. I think that’s what really good story telling and journalism does: it allows people to see the world in a way they hadn’t before.  When this happens, our little worlds keep growing, and we can stop ourselves from becoming close-minded and stubborn. So take a step inside the world of someone different to you, and have a look around. You might like what you see. 

Snap!

Everyone knows that a picture says a thousand words. So it makes sense that in the world of news journalism, a place of short, punchy sentences and word limits, that we'd let pictures do the talking that we don't have the space to do. Sometimes, in fact, pictures have a deeper story than words could ever tell.

Photo albums are a great example of this. Families keep photo albums, or these days, USB’s, full of memories. And these memories are mostly in picture form, with maybe a few words scribbled on the back. People know that pictures tell a story, so when they have a moment they want to remember they take a few happy snaps. You don’t see too many families whipping out their notebooks to take down what’s happening at a family dinner. Instead, Aunty Marg just huddles everyone around for a photo. I, for one, am guilty of sneaking out my Polaroid when a particularly memorable moment arises. So it only makes sense that journalists would start snapping away at the scene of an interesting event.  And since you’d think that journalists would only write about interesting things, there’s a place for a photo in every story.

More and more, photos are starting to tell the story in journalism. Online news websites are littered with photo galleries, and just about every news story published on the web is accompanied by a photo. While some news photos are particularly dull and posed, others stay with you, and convey a much greater meaning than words ever could. Take, for example, this photo taken of the Black Saturday fires. In one picture, so much is said without uttering a single word.

Newspapers, online news and magazines are starting to become the photo albums of the world around us. Sure, words still play a major part. Pictures don’t truly come to life until you hear the story behind them. But it’s important to think about the photos that get put with a story. Just like no one wants to see half of Uncle Albert cut off in a photo, readers don’t want to see some cookie cutter picture that has no life or story behind it. Journalists are getting creative with their photography, and through it are creating some of the best photo albums of history that the world’s ever seen. So snap away, my journalistically minded friends. Because a picture can bring your writing to life, and maybe even give you those magical extra thousand words.