Do you believe journalists truly serve you, the citizen? Why or why not? What should be done differently so that you, the citizen, are effectively served?

Whether or not journalists truly serve me, the citizen, is a very multifaceted question.  Journalism comes through all different forms and mediums and there are thousands of different news outlets from which to get one's information.  Consequently, there is a huge range in quality throughout the journalistic field.    Before taking this class, I was thoroughly disenchanted with the media and those who reported it.  The fact that my homepage was Yahoo! (because that's where my email was) most likely contributed to this disgust, as most of their "news" consisted of stories like these:

As much as I would love to read about Pamela Anderson's airline attire and which beers are the best, I concluded that serious journalism had gone the way of all the earth.  I used to watch the evening news on several stations, but ultimately felt like I was being lead astray through manipulation of evidence and footage that was doctored in order to fit the biases of the station.  It wasn't so much what the journalists were saying, it was what they WEREN'T.  I felt there were so many more important stories to report on, but that I was being bombarded by useless information about celebrities and other such nonsense simply because those were the type of stories that sold the advertising.  In fact, I also read a story (on Yahoo!, but it was more substantive the usual), about the difference in American Time magazine covers compared to the international copies.  Instead of featuring the Egyptian revolution as the others did, it displayed a cartoon illustrating a piece that talked about anxiety being good for you.  Although both magazines contained both stories, I felt that the American mainstream media was emphasizing stories they thought would be more palatable for the public.

However, when I started my Principles of Journalism class, I was asked to read a good amount of the New York Times for different quizzes.  Before, I had never really had the time to find a quality news outlet, sit down and read and actually digest it.  Now though, I'm forced to do so, and I hopefully will retain that habit even after this class ends.  Although the New York Times, of course, has its own biases, they are most certainly not as pronounced as other news I have read, and the stories are both interesting, intelligent and well-written.  The New York Times also reduces the amount of ads in their paper if more room is needed for an important story.  I was pleased to find that there were some select outlets that still upheld the principles of quality journalism

Now I realize this marketing of inane stories isn't entirely the media's fault.  If the public is the one reading the material, and they read the idiotic stories, advertisers realize that's what sells and those are the types of stories they pay for.  However, if a news organization establishes itself as an institution that only produces quality journalism and then live up to that promise, both advertisers and the public will recognize the importance of this quality and respond favorably. 

As long as quality is the aim rather than profit, their will always be enough people to appreciate that integrity.  As long as the public is given the evidence for stories as it really was instead of doctored to change the context, their will always be people to appreciate that honesty. And as long both the public and the media realize the importance of understanding and changing the world around us through true information, we can all appreciate the growth that will stem from that idea.

What purpose does journalism serve in your everyday life?

The easy pat answer to this question might be something like "journalism provides me with information about the world outside of my own direct experience" or "journalism informs me of the problems in my community and society".  Well of course it does.  The real question is, what do you DO with that information?  How do you let the information you receive influence your life?  Obviously journalism's purpose is to instruct you and give you reference to what is happening around you, but everyone reacts differently to information.  In my life, journalism plays a huge role in inspiring me.

I have a myriad of goals and ambitions and no idea how to go about accomplishing them.  However, ever since I can remember having these goals, I also remember clipping out newspaper or magazine articles about  people or events that gave me ideas or inspired me to do what they have accomplished.  I keep these for reference for those days when I'm going to set about accomplishing all my impossibly high goals.  I've saved articles about Scott Neeson, who left his lucrative job as a Hollywood producer to bring sustenance and education to starving children.  I clipped out a National Geographic article that described the land mine conditions in war-torn Cambodia and what they were doing to combat the accidental explosions.  I want to use all the information that I'm given to allow myself to be inspired to make history as well as record it.  Many people are easily discouraged by what they read in the news.  But I want to be inspired by it.  If something discourages you, set out to change it!  And be that inspiration for others.

What does journalism mean to you?

As humans, we have innate desires.  One of the most powerful of these desires is the need for information.  Especially in this day and age, we consume information about the world around us constantly, even if what we're learning does not directly affect us.  We must learn and share, inform and understand.  In fact, the only way we can cope with much of our lives is to find a way to understand what happens around us, or at least convince ourselves that we understand, even if we have no hope of doing so.  The free sharing of information is crucial to a democracy, otherwise those in power can so easily take advantage of that power and abuse it.  Without the sharing of ideas and stories, no one would be able to come together and make a change, or fix a horrible situation.  No one would be inspired by the success stories of other people achieving their dreams.  Each person would live in their own small world, never having a chance to expand.

And this is what journalists make possible.  Recently, the quality of journalism and the media in general  has gone - to put it eloquently - down the tubes.  News has become entertainment and entertainment has become news.  The definition of a journalist has become hazy at best, and many people have begun to distrust those that call themselves as such.  But fundamentally, a journalist - a real journalist - is something that embodies the word knowledge.  Journalists' first obligation is to the truth.  To discover what that truth is and then make it known.  They must also be an independent verification of that truth, allowing people who need and want information and knowledge to rely on what they're saying and then be able to form their own opinion from that information.  The world is full of those spouting their own, uneducated opinion.  It has no need of more of that.  It DOES have need, however, of pure, simple and unbiased knowledge, so that those who want to make an informed decision, actually can.  And that is what a journalist is.  An embodiment of truth and knowledge.  A person who puts their own selfish instincts and opinions on hold so that others can have the truth.  

http://www.journalism.org/resources/principles