Journalists have some serious work to do if they wish to gain the public’s trust.
That’s the inescapable conclusion to be drawn from “The Elements of Journalism,” the recently published book by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel.
Their findings reflect the major concerns expressed by thousands of this newspaper’s readers.
“I think the so-called credibility crisis in the press often has been misunderstood,” Rosenstiel said in an interview. “Journalists have focused on whether we should have more corrections or whether stories are too long, as if you could fix the credibility crisis through a set of specific items.
“I think the disconnect between the press and the public is rooted in something more basic – distrust of the press about its motives.
“Journalists think they are working in the public’s interest. The public thinks, ‘Baloney, you’re in it for a buck, or fame, or even cheap thrills at the expense of other people’s feelings.’ That implies the press needs to change its approach to the public in a very basic way.”
Kovach is chairman of the Committee of Concerned Journalists; Rosenstiel is director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism.
In the book, they illuminate the threats to journalism and build their case for emphasis on elements that support its mission: “The primary purpose of journalism is to provide citizens with the information they need to be free and self-governing.”
The elements:
- Journalism’s first obligation is to the truth.
- Its first loyalty is to citizens.
- Its essence is a discipline of verification.
- Its practitioners must maintain an independence from those they cover.
- It must serve as an independent monitor of power.
- It must provide a forum for public criticism and compromise.
- It must strive to make the significant interesting and relevant.
- It must keep the news comprehensive and proportional.
- Its practitioners must be allowed to exercise their personal consciences.
“If we can’t justify or articulate what we’re doing and why, how can we expect the public to choose serious journalism over the phony stuff that looks like journalism but isn’t?” Rosenstiel said.
The path to understanding, he believes, is through conversations, in the newsroom, in the community and in the newspaper.
“It is necessary because people have so many other choices for information,” he said. “We need to explain to the public what our values are and why they matter. We must develop and refine a strict discipline of verification and make it transparent to the public, to allow people to judge the value of what we learned.”
While fearful of some trends, he is optimistic.
“We could go through a pretty dark period if those who control journalism lose faith in the public. It really comes down to their view of citizens: Are they customers to be sold a product or partners in democracy? Do you appeal to the better angels of somebody’s nature or to the base side? That will determine the kind of journalism you produce,” he said.
“If we fail, it will not be because the public is flawed but because journalism will have failed its profession and purpose.”
Sobering words, worth consideration by all.
