There are many interesting elements in “A Short History of Journalism for Journalists: A Proposal and Essay” by James W. Carey that help explain journalism and the history of its importance. On page 7, we start to get a glimpse of how the terms news, reporting and journalism being used as synonyms can cause confusion when trying to explain the difference between the three, and what each one entails. There are requirements for every scope of practice throughout the media, and pertaining to journalism Carey writes, ”For this practice to emerge on a significant scale, at least three conditions were necessary: The ability to read and write had to be widespread, cheap paper and writing instruments had to be easily and cheaply available, and a belief had to emerge that the life of the individual was important enough that it was worthwhile for someone to record the events, moods, happenings, and emotions-the passing details of one’s own life” (Carey, p. 7 para. 2). This is extremely important to describe the nature of journalism not only in the beginnings of time, but in today’s world as well. As stated later on the same page, we see how there was a problem with readers not being able to determine whether or not they were reading factual fiction or actual facts. Is this due to tone? Were early journalists rather creative writers? These three conditions did not explicitly state how important tone is to journalism, but is an extremely relevant example of how writers can sometimes not be trusted.
Another interesting element in this reading was found on page 11. This page discussed the relevance of journalism in a public sphere and when it started to turn political. The public sphere needed to follow conditions of being in a public space in which strangers would gather to discuss relevant topics. In earlier times, this was their way of discussing news without royal control watching over them. The public sphere however was formed initially based on the interests of the literary world and when the arts escaped the court patronage. Carey goes on to write, “The literary public sphere was transformed into a political sphere when economic production by the rising bourgeois class came out from under exclusive royal control as the licensing system failed to keep pace with the needs of society” (Carey, p. 11 para 2). This is interesting because their idea of the public is different than today’s. During this time, public space was dependent on public talents, manners, and habits while welcoming strangers. There were expectations in these spaces that did not necessarily include all individuals. However, in today’s world, the public can be referred to as those in a certain state or country, or can simply be the general public, with everyone included. With journalism being so vitally important to today’s society, it is interesting that journalists once feared the court patronage and royal control which resulted in these public sphere being created.
An interesting element in the reading “A Short History of Journalism for Journalists: A Proposal and Essay” by James W. Carey talks about journalists’ knowledge and how they get that knowledge. “What Journalists know and how they know it, what journalists write and how they write it, what stories interest journalists and the form that interests takes, is pretty much governed by the here and now, a ‘to know a city is to know its streets approach to things” (pg 4) This local knowledge that journalists hold is an element that holds major interest. How do reporters get information? Is it true? Is it reliable? This is an important element because when producing an article it needs to hold some truth to it. To keep an opinion based statement out of it. This goes towards the role of journalist which is to know local knowledge and be able to inform others of it. It is an important role when informing the public on certain topics about things that could have taken place in the past, or in the now. It all has to hold a truth to it.
Another interesting element is how people bring expectations to journalism and what it should be about. There are expectations between journalism and the readers, viewers and listeners. It is an important element because of the expectations from the quality of the work and how it is communicated.
The two key elements that popped out to me were highlighted throughout the reading but really given their chance to show the close intersectionality between them in the context of Journalism. On page 14 James Carey says, “Reading the newspaper in the early morning is a kind of realistic morning prayer. One orients one’s attitude against the world and toward God [in one case], or toward the world [in the other] The former gives the same security as the latter in that one knows where one stands.” This popped out to me personally because it made me stop and think. Although I don’t get my news feed from a newspaper anymore, social media does its part in keeping me up to date on a good amount of things going on in the world. With that being said I do find myself, as said above “One orients one’s attitude against the world and toward god [in one case], or toward the world [in the other]” This part of the quote was what really caught my eye. The news has a huge sway on our attitudes towards the world, and for some towards God on top of that. As a society, when something catastrophic happens, for example the wildfires in L.A, most are one, informed of what’s going on, because of the news, but also have feelings about it. From my experience when enough people are feeling that way, I can tell that the news has had an effect on our moods. On the flip side of that, another example would be trumps inauguration. Overall, as a country considering he was voted in, the mood has shifted back upwards because the majority are happy to see him back in office.
Reading “A Short History of Journalism for Journalists: A Proposal and Essay by James W. Carey has greatly helped me understand not only the history of journalism but its importance. Specifically when Carey explains the prehistory of journalism, including Mitchell Stephens and Micheal Schudson’s views on whether reporting was external or temporal. They both agreed it was external because society would not be able to survive without some kind of monitoring or signaling system. This caught my interest because of present-day technology, our society still needs constant information and entertainment. When a major event happens, the community reacts in a panic. They need constant updates on the situation at hand with new information. Although journalism was around before the technological age, communities still rely on it the same, but through different resources. Another aspect I found interesting was the communal idea of journalism. It is not only a community in itself by keeping those up to date whether it is monthly, weekly, daily, or even hourly, but also creates a private habit in the community. This means there is a record of facts and life in the community but also social memory. Although people may have different views or interests, they have this community in common that journalists have helped create. Although lots of this news is now digital, the overall ideas continue to be important in people’s everyday lives. This also relates to the press’s relationship with those in power. They can choose what to report on and how truthful that information is. This forms other sectors of a community because of people’s religious or political beliefs.
Through the reading of A Short History of Journalism for Journalists, it was very interesting to see the different aspects that were pulled together from history. I have a special interest in the printing press because of the fact that I took German while I was in high school and I understood the creation and point of the printing press from a cultural standpoint versus a journalistic standpoint. So it just caught my eye and made me think about how that event caused so much to happen initially I didn’t think of. Another thing that was interesting was looking at the ending of the essay and how they described the break between secular and sacred. Which is very interesting because I never had thought about how the newspaper was a daily ritual for many people for many years to this day my grandfather will write read the newspaper every morning and I’ve never really understood it but breaking it down within the essay was very interesting because he is a very religious person and he does read it every day and he does base a lot of viewpoints on what’s going on with the news and such. It’s a very interesting point to separate this and how the nation when it was founded unintentionally did the separation of religion and politics within the newspaper. Also the world has used journalism in many ways.
One thing I found interesting was how democracy and journalism went hand in hand. This was interesting to me because those two being connected would have never crossed my mind if I had not read it. In the article it says “The origins of journalism are the same as the origins of republican or democratic forms of governance–no journalism, no democracy. But it is equally true that without democracy, there can be no journalism” (Carey). Journalism is part of our first amendment (the freedom of speech), which means that if that gets taken away then democracy then would fall apart but I had never even thought about those two being similar. Another thing that I had found interesting was how when I think of journalism all I think of is people writing about gossip or politics and producing it to the public, but in the text it explains how without journalism and reporting the survival rate of human life would be a lot less. Without a journalist or reporter telling the community about a natural disaster or something dangerous they will not be able to get to safety in time. Which is why journalism is very important and I had not thought about it in that way.
The public sphere is a social space that is between private and state spheres. In this space people can come together and form a public opinion and exchange ideas. The reading explores how the public sphere and journalism advanced together in the 18th century. They played a big role in reading a shared sense of awareness, in return helping democracy progress. Originally journalism was a place for gossip and facts but it soon turned into a more formalized tool for political engagement, creating democracy.
The reading “A Short History of Journalism for Journalists” also talks about the joining of journalism, democracy, and nationalism. In the reading Benedict Anderson shares a concept of the imagined community. Suggesting that print media and newspapers were a key factor to creating a shared sense of identity for many people, even though these people may never meet each other. The common space of journalism made it possible for individuals with the same experiences able to read about the same events and in return created a national community. This imagined bond created nationalism.
“News and reporting are eternal, for no sentient creature, let alone a society, can survive without some kind of a monitoring and signaling system, however primitive, whereby threatening changes in the ambient world are recorded and disseminated.” This is important because without journalists, the world wouldn’t be able to receive news or information like weather, disasters, mayhem, economic success and failures, etc. Word by mouth and travel is how things used to spread, but with the news whether it’s in a newspaper or on a social platform, it spreads much more quickly.
“The ability to read and write had to be widespread, cheap paper and writing instruments had to be easily and cheaply available, and a belief had to emerge that the life of the individual was important enough that it was worthwhile for someone to record the events, moods, happenings, and emotions – the passing details of one’s own life
An interesting component of the article was from a section of the works by Robert Darnton’s about French history. It explained how news was spread by mouth and all you had to do to obtain information was stand with your ear out. Word of mouth was the most convenient way to learn about current events. Information came from people who claimed to have sources such as a servant working in Versaille. These pieces of knowledge were distributed in public places. An issue mentioned was the lack of accuracy occasionally. Information spread was either reliable or pure gossip. The first “reporter” was described as a person who would go visit people around town collecting news and documenting it. Eventually these new reporters made money by copying the news and sending it as letters to people living in other places. I found this section to be very interesting as it is an example of the first ever journalism. It is important as it allows us to understand where journalism came from and how it has grown over time. This story captured the nature of journalism as it also had the purpose of informing others on current events. The goal was to distribute news from person to person. Similarly to journalism now, it also faced issues with unreliable information. The journalist in the story does what a journalist does now and gathers information to share with the public. Another interesting component of the article was the conflict that the press had with those in power in France. The main reason that the police were unhappy with this journalism was that it “infringed on the crown”. Those in power disliked that the works of government were being discussed freely by citizens. In order to shut this down, police were deployed to stop all forms of this communication. The charges presented to those engaging would be for seditious libel which is when printing is done with the purpose of using in contempt of the government. Many people got arrested but that did not stop this practice. Printing was done illegally and was imported somewhere else. This story demonstrates the relationship that the press has with those in power. Government officials often do not approve of journalism because their faults are being broadcasted for citizens to see. It can lead to their people turning against them and advocating for change. The people in old France did not have their right to a free society as their voices were silenced. The freedom of press is equivalent to democracy. Journalism is vital in educating people on the issues with those in power, even if they do not like it.
My first interesting element of the reading had to do with the early development of journalism and how James W. Carey defined it. He talks about how at first journalism was the practice of keeping a personal journal and how the word itself came from the French word for day. Eventually though, this form of journalism was “socialized, made collective”. Journalism became a serial biography of a community over the course of some sort of regular timeframe, as Carey defines it. Part of this change was said to be due the further development of writing systems and new means of storage and archive. Although some of these things were around they weren’t all put together to form this “new journalism” until the eighteenth century. I just found this part of the reading to be quite interesting as it shed light on the nature of journalism and where its roots are.
A second interesting element I found in the reading was about how Carey stressed the connection between journalism and democracy. He argues that the “origins of journalism are the same as the origins of republican or democratic forms of governance—no journalism, no democracy”. I also thought it was interesting how he talked about how without the spirit of democracy journalists are reduced to propagandists or entertainers. Furthermore, he talks about the true meaning of journalists to serve democracy and not to act as “propagandists for the state”. I think this section of the text also shares more insight into the nature of journalism and is highly important.
The first interesting element in the reading that caught my eye was how the author stated; “journalists are rarely interested in what is general and Universal concentrating instead on what happens in this time and place”. This nature of Journalism makes every report unique. As journalism is a “craft of place” meaning it’s shaped by local knowledge and how the journalist sees the story and chooses to write about it. The second element I found interesting was the quote, “no journalism no democracy” and the equal truth that without democracy there is no journalism. The author States how this seems to be tying journalists up with the job of maintaining democracy. However journalists can be independent or objective about anything they want besides democracy. Because doing that would take the heart out of Journalism.
Q How could having a great understanding of the history of journalism give new journalists an advantage?
Q What is the difference between eternal and temporal journalism?
2 interesting elements from A Short History On Journalism
Carey stated in his essay that journalism became the most systematic and experienced a substantial growth in the spirit of nationalism. The nation can unite itself over people who would never meet on the regular reading the same news and commenting on the same topics. It is a nice sentiment that someone can gain reassurance that the people they are surrounded by can have something in common by seeing they are all reading the same newspaper. Carey also talks about how finding community in anonymity is a staple in modern nations. However, though journalism thrives in this environment it can also take away fundamentals to journalism. Since its creation it has been inherently rebellious, focusing on exposing those in government or humanizing figures in the public eye. By embracing anonymity and with-it nationalism the rebellion gets lost. Carey does address it though and says that journalists are not obligated to be indifferent or objective, and if they did, they are reduced to propagandists. Both sides of the coin are journalism, perhaps one is more devoted to the original intent on educating the public, but idea of the same thing creating or taking away a free society is a contradiction that adds layers to the seemingly simple idea of just gathering and reporting events.
The role and duties of a journalist is also an interesting element that adds onto what impact it has in society. A journalist seemingly just reports the events that happen and leaves the interpretation to the public. However, the way the events are presented, which ones are given more attention, and the tone of writing have influnce to how it is perceived. So, the journalist has just much of a say whether they are perpetuating propagandic information or exposing it, even if it’s all the same event that is being reported on. Historically the original purpose of journalism was to give the community a voice and so historically it is the job of the journalist to accurately represent and educate the community. Acting on behalf of the nation alone though it seems noble to the country isn’t always noble to the integrity of the practice and or still doing the original job it was intended to do. A nation is made up of communities but losing face and letting another force drive the journalism field is forgetting who it was made for.
12 thoughts on “JOURNAL # 2”
There are many interesting elements in “A Short History of Journalism for Journalists: A Proposal and Essay” by James W. Carey that help explain journalism and the history of its importance. On page 7, we start to get a glimpse of how the terms news, reporting and journalism being used as synonyms can cause confusion when trying to explain the difference between the three, and what each one entails. There are requirements for every scope of practice throughout the media, and pertaining to journalism Carey writes, ”For this practice to emerge on a significant scale, at least three conditions were necessary: The ability to read and write had to be widespread, cheap paper and writing instruments had to be easily and cheaply available, and a belief had to emerge that the life of the individual was important enough that it was worthwhile for someone to record the events, moods, happenings, and emotions-the passing details of one’s own life” (Carey, p. 7 para. 2). This is extremely important to describe the nature of journalism not only in the beginnings of time, but in today’s world as well. As stated later on the same page, we see how there was a problem with readers not being able to determine whether or not they were reading factual fiction or actual facts. Is this due to tone? Were early journalists rather creative writers? These three conditions did not explicitly state how important tone is to journalism, but is an extremely relevant example of how writers can sometimes not be trusted.
Another interesting element in this reading was found on page 11. This page discussed the relevance of journalism in a public sphere and when it started to turn political. The public sphere needed to follow conditions of being in a public space in which strangers would gather to discuss relevant topics. In earlier times, this was their way of discussing news without royal control watching over them. The public sphere however was formed initially based on the interests of the literary world and when the arts escaped the court patronage. Carey goes on to write, “The literary public sphere was transformed into a political sphere when economic production by the rising bourgeois class came out from under exclusive royal control as the licensing system failed to keep pace with the needs of society” (Carey, p. 11 para 2). This is interesting because their idea of the public is different than today’s. During this time, public space was dependent on public talents, manners, and habits while welcoming strangers. There were expectations in these spaces that did not necessarily include all individuals. However, in today’s world, the public can be referred to as those in a certain state or country, or can simply be the general public, with everyone included. With journalism being so vitally important to today’s society, it is interesting that journalists once feared the court patronage and royal control which resulted in these public sphere being created.
An interesting element in the reading “A Short History of Journalism for Journalists: A Proposal and Essay” by James W. Carey talks about journalists’ knowledge and how they get that knowledge. “What Journalists know and how they know it, what journalists write and how they write it, what stories interest journalists and the form that interests takes, is pretty much governed by the here and now, a ‘to know a city is to know its streets approach to things” (pg 4) This local knowledge that journalists hold is an element that holds major interest. How do reporters get information? Is it true? Is it reliable? This is an important element because when producing an article it needs to hold some truth to it. To keep an opinion based statement out of it. This goes towards the role of journalist which is to know local knowledge and be able to inform others of it. It is an important role when informing the public on certain topics about things that could have taken place in the past, or in the now. It all has to hold a truth to it.
Another interesting element is how people bring expectations to journalism and what it should be about. There are expectations between journalism and the readers, viewers and listeners. It is an important element because of the expectations from the quality of the work and how it is communicated.
The two key elements that popped out to me were highlighted throughout the reading but really given their chance to show the close intersectionality between them in the context of Journalism. On page 14 James Carey says, “Reading the newspaper in the early morning is a kind of realistic morning prayer. One orients one’s attitude against the world and toward God [in one case], or toward the world [in the other] The former gives the same security as the latter in that one knows where one stands.” This popped out to me personally because it made me stop and think. Although I don’t get my news feed from a newspaper anymore, social media does its part in keeping me up to date on a good amount of things going on in the world. With that being said I do find myself, as said above “One orients one’s attitude against the world and toward god [in one case], or toward the world [in the other]” This part of the quote was what really caught my eye. The news has a huge sway on our attitudes towards the world, and for some towards God on top of that. As a society, when something catastrophic happens, for example the wildfires in L.A, most are one, informed of what’s going on, because of the news, but also have feelings about it. From my experience when enough people are feeling that way, I can tell that the news has had an effect on our moods. On the flip side of that, another example would be trumps inauguration. Overall, as a country considering he was voted in, the mood has shifted back upwards because the majority are happy to see him back in office.
Reading “A Short History of Journalism for Journalists: A Proposal and Essay by James W. Carey has greatly helped me understand not only the history of journalism but its importance. Specifically when Carey explains the prehistory of journalism, including Mitchell Stephens and Micheal Schudson’s views on whether reporting was external or temporal. They both agreed it was external because society would not be able to survive without some kind of monitoring or signaling system. This caught my interest because of present-day technology, our society still needs constant information and entertainment. When a major event happens, the community reacts in a panic. They need constant updates on the situation at hand with new information. Although journalism was around before the technological age, communities still rely on it the same, but through different resources. Another aspect I found interesting was the communal idea of journalism. It is not only a community in itself by keeping those up to date whether it is monthly, weekly, daily, or even hourly, but also creates a private habit in the community. This means there is a record of facts and life in the community but also social memory. Although people may have different views or interests, they have this community in common that journalists have helped create. Although lots of this news is now digital, the overall ideas continue to be important in people’s everyday lives. This also relates to the press’s relationship with those in power. They can choose what to report on and how truthful that information is. This forms other sectors of a community because of people’s religious or political beliefs.
Through the reading of A Short History of Journalism for Journalists, it was very interesting to see the different aspects that were pulled together from history. I have a special interest in the printing press because of the fact that I took German while I was in high school and I understood the creation and point of the printing press from a cultural standpoint versus a journalistic standpoint. So it just caught my eye and made me think about how that event caused so much to happen initially I didn’t think of. Another thing that was interesting was looking at the ending of the essay and how they described the break between secular and sacred. Which is very interesting because I never had thought about how the newspaper was a daily ritual for many people for many years to this day my grandfather will write read the newspaper every morning and I’ve never really understood it but breaking it down within the essay was very interesting because he is a very religious person and he does read it every day and he does base a lot of viewpoints on what’s going on with the news and such. It’s a very interesting point to separate this and how the nation when it was founded unintentionally did the separation of religion and politics within the newspaper. Also the world has used journalism in many ways.
One thing I found interesting was how democracy and journalism went hand in hand. This was interesting to me because those two being connected would have never crossed my mind if I had not read it. In the article it says “The origins of journalism are the same as the origins of republican or democratic forms of governance–no journalism, no democracy. But it is equally true that without democracy, there can be no journalism” (Carey). Journalism is part of our first amendment (the freedom of speech), which means that if that gets taken away then democracy then would fall apart but I had never even thought about those two being similar. Another thing that I had found interesting was how when I think of journalism all I think of is people writing about gossip or politics and producing it to the public, but in the text it explains how without journalism and reporting the survival rate of human life would be a lot less. Without a journalist or reporter telling the community about a natural disaster or something dangerous they will not be able to get to safety in time. Which is why journalism is very important and I had not thought about it in that way.
The public sphere is a social space that is between private and state spheres. In this space people can come together and form a public opinion and exchange ideas. The reading explores how the public sphere and journalism advanced together in the 18th century. They played a big role in reading a shared sense of awareness, in return helping democracy progress. Originally journalism was a place for gossip and facts but it soon turned into a more formalized tool for political engagement, creating democracy.
The reading “A Short History of Journalism for Journalists” also talks about the joining of journalism, democracy, and nationalism. In the reading Benedict Anderson shares a concept of the imagined community. Suggesting that print media and newspapers were a key factor to creating a shared sense of identity for many people, even though these people may never meet each other. The common space of journalism made it possible for individuals with the same experiences able to read about the same events and in return created a national community. This imagined bond created nationalism.
“News and reporting are eternal, for no sentient creature, let alone a society, can survive without some kind of a monitoring and signaling system, however primitive, whereby threatening changes in the ambient world are recorded and disseminated.” This is important because without journalists, the world wouldn’t be able to receive news or information like weather, disasters, mayhem, economic success and failures, etc. Word by mouth and travel is how things used to spread, but with the news whether it’s in a newspaper or on a social platform, it spreads much more quickly.
“The ability to read and write had to be widespread, cheap paper and writing instruments had to be easily and cheaply available, and a belief had to emerge that the life of the individual was important enough that it was worthwhile for someone to record the events, moods, happenings, and emotions – the passing details of one’s own life
Journal #2- Jadyn Stevens
An interesting component of the article was from a section of the works by Robert Darnton’s about French history. It explained how news was spread by mouth and all you had to do to obtain information was stand with your ear out. Word of mouth was the most convenient way to learn about current events. Information came from people who claimed to have sources such as a servant working in Versaille. These pieces of knowledge were distributed in public places. An issue mentioned was the lack of accuracy occasionally. Information spread was either reliable or pure gossip. The first “reporter” was described as a person who would go visit people around town collecting news and documenting it. Eventually these new reporters made money by copying the news and sending it as letters to people living in other places. I found this section to be very interesting as it is an example of the first ever journalism. It is important as it allows us to understand where journalism came from and how it has grown over time. This story captured the nature of journalism as it also had the purpose of informing others on current events. The goal was to distribute news from person to person. Similarly to journalism now, it also faced issues with unreliable information. The journalist in the story does what a journalist does now and gathers information to share with the public. Another interesting component of the article was the conflict that the press had with those in power in France. The main reason that the police were unhappy with this journalism was that it “infringed on the crown”. Those in power disliked that the works of government were being discussed freely by citizens. In order to shut this down, police were deployed to stop all forms of this communication. The charges presented to those engaging would be for seditious libel which is when printing is done with the purpose of using in contempt of the government. Many people got arrested but that did not stop this practice. Printing was done illegally and was imported somewhere else. This story demonstrates the relationship that the press has with those in power. Government officials often do not approve of journalism because their faults are being broadcasted for citizens to see. It can lead to their people turning against them and advocating for change. The people in old France did not have their right to a free society as their voices were silenced. The freedom of press is equivalent to democracy. Journalism is vital in educating people on the issues with those in power, even if they do not like it.
My first interesting element of the reading had to do with the early development of journalism and how James W. Carey defined it. He talks about how at first journalism was the practice of keeping a personal journal and how the word itself came from the French word for day. Eventually though, this form of journalism was “socialized, made collective”. Journalism became a serial biography of a community over the course of some sort of regular timeframe, as Carey defines it. Part of this change was said to be due the further development of writing systems and new means of storage and archive. Although some of these things were around they weren’t all put together to form this “new journalism” until the eighteenth century. I just found this part of the reading to be quite interesting as it shed light on the nature of journalism and where its roots are.
A second interesting element I found in the reading was about how Carey stressed the connection between journalism and democracy. He argues that the “origins of journalism are the same as the origins of republican or democratic forms of governance—no journalism, no democracy”. I also thought it was interesting how he talked about how without the spirit of democracy journalists are reduced to propagandists or entertainers. Furthermore, he talks about the true meaning of journalists to serve democracy and not to act as “propagandists for the state”. I think this section of the text also shares more insight into the nature of journalism and is highly important.
The first interesting element in the reading that caught my eye was how the author stated; “journalists are rarely interested in what is general and Universal concentrating instead on what happens in this time and place”. This nature of Journalism makes every report unique. As journalism is a “craft of place” meaning it’s shaped by local knowledge and how the journalist sees the story and chooses to write about it. The second element I found interesting was the quote, “no journalism no democracy” and the equal truth that without democracy there is no journalism. The author States how this seems to be tying journalists up with the job of maintaining democracy. However journalists can be independent or objective about anything they want besides democracy. Because doing that would take the heart out of Journalism.
Q How could having a great understanding of the history of journalism give new journalists an advantage?
Q What is the difference between eternal and temporal journalism?
2 interesting elements from A Short History On Journalism
Carey stated in his essay that journalism became the most systematic and experienced a substantial growth in the spirit of nationalism. The nation can unite itself over people who would never meet on the regular reading the same news and commenting on the same topics. It is a nice sentiment that someone can gain reassurance that the people they are surrounded by can have something in common by seeing they are all reading the same newspaper. Carey also talks about how finding community in anonymity is a staple in modern nations. However, though journalism thrives in this environment it can also take away fundamentals to journalism. Since its creation it has been inherently rebellious, focusing on exposing those in government or humanizing figures in the public eye. By embracing anonymity and with-it nationalism the rebellion gets lost. Carey does address it though and says that journalists are not obligated to be indifferent or objective, and if they did, they are reduced to propagandists. Both sides of the coin are journalism, perhaps one is more devoted to the original intent on educating the public, but idea of the same thing creating or taking away a free society is a contradiction that adds layers to the seemingly simple idea of just gathering and reporting events.
The role and duties of a journalist is also an interesting element that adds onto what impact it has in society. A journalist seemingly just reports the events that happen and leaves the interpretation to the public. However, the way the events are presented, which ones are given more attention, and the tone of writing have influnce to how it is perceived. So, the journalist has just much of a say whether they are perpetuating propagandic information or exposing it, even if it’s all the same event that is being reported on. Historically the original purpose of journalism was to give the community a voice and so historically it is the job of the journalist to accurately represent and educate the community. Acting on behalf of the nation alone though it seems noble to the country isn’t always noble to the integrity of the practice and or still doing the original job it was intended to do. A nation is made up of communities but losing face and letting another force drive the journalism field is forgetting who it was made for.