“Journalists are increasingly de-professionalised, becoming ‘news processors’ rather than news gatherers.” Critically evaluate this statement.
In David Randall’s ‘The Universal Journalist’, his forth chapter entitled ‘What Makes a Good Reporter’ reads; ‘What reporters do is find things out. They go in first, amid the chaos of now, battering at closed doors, often taking risks, to capture the beginnings of the truth’ (Randall 1996: 29).This interpretation of what makes a good reporter connotes a sense of courage and bravery, which is arguably a rather archaic view, however are the same attributes associated with the news processers who mediate the public interest in today’s society? Michael Bromley asserts that developments in most aspects of journalism have meant journalists must adjust in order to compete in today’s market. ‘My object in writing this article is to point out the extraordinary development of British journalism within the last half century, and to show how discoveries in science, improvements in machinery, alterations to social life, and changes in the character and tastes of the newspaper reader have transformed the old journalism into the new’ (Bromley & O’Malley 1997: 102) This quote taken from ‘A Journalism Reader’ (1997) refers to how social, mechanical and scientific developments have left journalism with no choice but to adapt.
According to Anthony Giddens, ‘professionals gain their position largely from their possession of credentials – degrees, diplomas and other qualifications. As a whole they enjoy relatively secure and remunerative careers and their separation from people in more routine non-manual jobs has probably grown more pronounced’ (Giddens 2009: 314). From this reference I can deduce professionals acquire their prestige as a result of success throughout their education and as a result of this success, they’re likely to experience greater success in the future in terms of well-paid career opportunities. To reinforce this concept Max Weber postulates doctors and lawyers use professionalization to secure their market position. For instance the introduction of the British Medical Association in 1857 offered the opportunity for professionalization to medics within the UK. Although professionalization doesn’t appear to be as applicable to journalism as what it seems to medicine. As Michael Bromley writes; ‘Political and social changes in the last quarter century have produced contradictory and confusing repercussions. The anti-union legislation of the 1980s removed occupational and internal-promotion barriers, allowing new entrants without formal training to surge through the system often at the expense of older, more experienced hands, while at the same time, the drive towards mass education has appeared to ‘professionalize’ the industry with around 70 per cent of journalists attending university or college’ (Bromley 2001: 157). As a result of the anti-union legislation act put forward in the 1980s, the industry has become less incestuous allowing a greater range of writers into the field. In accordance with this information, it would appear journalists are becoming more professionalized, as opposed to de-professionalized. Anthony Giddens would have been an advocate of Michael Bromley’s analysis of the influx of graduate journalists into the industry - in relation to the industry becoming professionalized.
In ‘The Handbook of Journalism Studies’ chapter two written by Kevin Branhurst and John Nerone, entitled Journalism History touches on the process of professionalization at the beginning on the twentieth century. ‘The professionalization project required a somewhat different form of journalism history. The new schools of journalism wanted a teachable history that could provide modern exemplars for aspiring professionals. The old Whig histories were somewhat useful, but only after being cleansed of their mavericks’ (Branhurst & Nerone 2009: 21). Again, highlighted by Branhurst and Nerone, a firm emphasis is asserted with education becoming a fundamental aspect of a journalists training; which again reinforces Giddens’ definition of what a professional is. Branhurst and Nerone expand by elaborating on the confusion surrounding journalisms status as a profession - ‘Journalism as a work routine and as an alienated occupation mystifies class power. Post-capitalist media systems, therefore, should work to expose and then overcome class power. Such systems could re-imagine journalism in two contrasting ways. Journalism could devolve to the province of ordinary citizens, or journalism could become the mission of a vanguard. The former case would absorb journalism into daily lives of citizens, but the latter case would produce the opposite: an intense professionalization of journalism practice. As it happened, the media systems of the communist countries tended toward Party vanguardism’ (Branhurst & Nerone 2009: 22). A unanimous preference in communist countries for journalism to become professionalized was evident; however, there was a time when a journalist’s professional status was questionable.
‘During the period of the greatest expansion of media (since c.1880) journalists might have been expected to have been in the forefront of the competition among the emerging ‘professional class’ for income, power and status (Perkin 1990: 1-29). Yet as early as 1907 journalism divided formally into those who sought professional status through the Institute of Journalists (IoJ) and those who felt the need to collectivise as ‘wage earners’ in the National Union of Journalists (NUJ)’ (Bromley & O’Malley 1997: 330). Years later, the NCTJ (National Committee of Training Journalsits) – emphasised work place craft skills, as opposed “professional knowledge”. In 1977 The Royal Commission claimed ‘lowly paid, lowly educated’ journalists were becoming radicalized, but however were regarded as ‘professionals’.
After considering professionalization surrounding journalism, I’ll now explore the changes in techniques used by journalists in relation to gathering news. In order to maintain a dominant role in such a competitive market, news companies have employed certain tools in order to collate stories and gather news. For example, ‘the diary’ exposes the evolution of news gathering methods; ‘The dairy is a key document in any news office. It records predictable events that automatically merit coverage by their unquestionable public importance. It is also a register of less significant events vying for inclusion in the ‘automatic’ category. In a sense production of the diary is news production in advance’ (Golding & Elliot 1979: 112). The diary is a technique employed by the majority of newsrooms, although in recent years more sinister news gathering methods have been utilized such as phone hacking. Clive Goodman (News of The World: Royal Editor) and David Mulclaire (private detective) in 2006 were convicted for intercepting the royal families phone calls. Police seized Mulcaire’s notes discovering 4,000 names, 4,000 mobile numbers, 5,000 landline numbers, near 4,775 potential victims however there were ‘no grounds for extending the investigation’. These more sinister techniques which enable journalists to gather exclusive information, demonstrate the lengths modern day news reporters are ready to go to, in order to meet deadlines or out do competition. Moreover, whilst it’s important in observing how news is gathered, the process of production is even more crucial with certain news companies maintaining a political bias or agenda.
‘In contrast, even a cursory glance at the academic literature which reports fieldwork undertaken by researcher examining news organisations, both in Europe and the USA, will reveal dozens of books and papers, with titles such as ‘Making the News’, ‘The Manufacture of News’, or ‘Putting Reality Together’. While these titles have been produced by academic researchers drawing upon a number of quite distinct theoretical approaches, from political economy through organisational theory to social constructionism, they all agree far from merely mirroring ‘what happens in the world’ , the practice of news journalism involves a process of manufacture or fabrication’ (Manning 2001: 49). From this reference it is made evident that a news companies agenda is perhaps more evident and ultimately determines what makes the news; this concept is also intrinsically linked with the Gatekeeper Theory.
After researching the professional status which is not so easy to connote with journalists, I maintain the view journalists are professionals, but in the last decade are starting to become de-professionalized. Through the process of education and training, graduates are able to apply there vocational knowledge into journalism. However, the competitive nature and pressures surrounding the industry, has forced journalists to utilize methods of news gathering which has tarnished a whole profession.
Bibliography:
Bromley, M & O’Malley, T (1997). A Journalism Reader. London: Routledge.
Manning, P (2001). News and News Sources: A Critical Introduction. London: Sage.
Preston, P (2009). Making The News: Journalsim and News Cultures in Europe. Oxon: Routledge.
Randall, D (1996). The Universal Journalist. London: Pluto Press.
Tumber, H (1999). News: A Reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Wahl-Jorgensen, K & Hanitzsch, T (2009). The Handbook of Journalism Studies. New York: Routledge