Journalism: more than ‘just the facts’
Since I have Oscar night images still floating around in the neurons responsible for obsessive compulsive movie disorder (OCMD), I couldn’t help but recall, as I pondered a journalism subject or two this week, a scene in a forgettable black-and-white film from long ago in which reporters are engaged in a scrum with a big city mayor.
The stereotypes from back then are in evidence: the mayor is fat and bald, defying gravity as his bulky frame sways indelicately on steep steps in front of a city hall building; the reporters (all male) are sloppily attired (they would make a Vanity Fair advertising editor cry in his sherry), and appear as if they are in desperate need of a straightener to reduce the morning after-shakes.
But what I remember best of all are the “just the facts” approach taken by the reporters, as well as their deference towards the figure of authority, the rotund politician gracious enough to give valuable minutes of his day to the ink-stained wretches.
Usually, at least in the way I have resurrected the scene, the mayor says something fairly innocuous, but even then, before the reporters start to scribble, a member of the media gang politely but excitedly asks: “Is that a quote, Mayor?”
When His Worship nods approval, with an exaggerated seriousness, the reporters then attack their notepads with sharpened pencils as if they’ve just been informed by the mayor that Jesus Christ himself would deliver a prayer before the weekly council proceedings.
Despite the caricatures, there was an element of truth from that era reflected in the relationship between the media and the politician: way too many reporters, and far too much of the public, perceived journalism strictly as an accumulation and delivery of information.
The reporters were simply couriers, two-legged carrier pigeons.
They were assigned to communicate what the societal bosses — the mayor, in this cinematic case — felt was appropriate, and nothing more.
Thankfully, much has changed, and we have been living in a more enlightened atmosphere — for the most part — for some time.
Still, debate about the way journalists practise their profession continues to take place, as well it should, evidenced this past week by a thoughtful piece written by veteran reporter Azzo Rezori for the CBC website about television networks and their right or left-wing political leanings.
Azzo, my good friend and former colleague, also wrote of the need for contextual and analytical journalism, and that angle, in particular, caught my eye.
Rezori’s column reiterated for me a long-standing belief that all journalism should be required to have context, that all reporters, from the minute they start collecting their newsroom salaries, should be told that “just the facts” is not nearly good enough.
It’s pure laziness to play the role of the stenographer (we labelled that sort of reporting as “he said” journalism back in the day: the premier announced yesterday blah, blah, blah. He said … He said … He said…).
If that was all that was required of journalists, news agencies could merely hire men and women with a talent for shorthand from the local secretarial pool.
I know there are still people out there who long for the “just the facts” days, but theirs is a shallow perspective and not worth even a token nod of appreciation, especially after all the hard-learned lessons of the past that have hopefully led Newfoundlanders to employ a healthy dose of scepticism when dealing with those in power (politicians, most especially, but others in positions of trust, must drool with envy thinking of the exalted position many of their predecessors enjoyed, ruling during times when their word was largely gospel).
It’s encouraging that there is, in recent times, an outlet, as well, for the Rezoris of the province — experienced reporters — to have a say, not just about journalism, but any other issues they may have tackled during their careers, or continue to cover — timeless stories to which they can supply an invaluable point of view.
For example, there’s also an insightful article on the CBC website written by David Cochrane about the political fallout for both the Liberals and the Tories from the much debated move to reduce the number of seats in the legislature.
It’s another illustration of the value of analytical journalism.
There’s also much value in opinion journalism.
Unlike The Telegram, where I can, with an admitted conflict of interest — given my columnist role here — reference the healthy abundance and diversity of opinion that punctuates the paper’s pages, the local CBC seems to have made a conscious decision to practically eliminate out-and-out commentary on both radio and television in recent times, a development I certainly never applauded. (I admit I am anything but objective, having orchestrated and dictated the daily use of commentators and satirists when I ran “Here and Now” — people like Ray Guy, Rex Murphy, Noreen Golfman, Pete Soucy as Snook, and others, and I have done commentaries for CBC Radio in these rocking chair, pensioned days of mine).
On radio, in the morning hours in particular, the CBC spends a lot of time on pancakes, Valentine’s Day, turkeys and other cornball content.
But I guess the ratings are up, even if the public broadcasting mandate to provide alternative programming is playing second fiddle to promotional silliness.
At least, though, there is the emergence of those website pieces, the type of material Azzo Rezori has been producing. And that’s downright refreshing. “Is that a quote?” Mark it down.