Already a member?
Welcome to Brazen Careerist!
Emily Ma is using Brazen Careerist to share ideas. Join now to become a member and start networking with Emily Ma and other professionals just like you. Learn more.
Brazen careerist
Where ambitious young professionals connect and grow
Email
Print
The other night over dinner, my mother-in-law made an excellent point with respect to the call to responsibility that President Barack Obama made in his inauguration speech.
Here’s what she said:
I hope the media does its part in helping to turn the country around. Reporting the news is one thing, but excessive negativity in coverage is another.
A brilliant point I think.
There’s a palpable connection bet
For more timely, relevant, and engaging articles,
subscribe to Brazen Careerist.
- How To Find a Writing Partner Who Can Help You Achieve Your Goals and Make More Money
- The Anti-Stalker’s Guide for Converting Online Contact into Real World Collaboration
- Why You Might Be Better Off Without a Job After College
- Continuing Education: Extending Learning Beyond Your Campus Years
- A New Kind of Business Mover and Shaker
Comments
01.27.09
I agree with this article for the most part. Would you have advocated the same idea if Bush were still president or do you believe the media should only look for the positive once "their guy" is in office?
01.27.09
Interesting article, but I disagree. The media at large has been blamed for not reporting on intelligence reports before 9/11 that predicted the possibility of a terrorist attack on US soil, and then they've been blamed for not reporting about what intelligence the Bush admin had before going to war in Iraq. They've been blamed for not reporting enough of the "negative" stuff -- so I think they're just trying to do their jobs and catch every story worth reporting.
01.27.09
I actually think that is a very good point. There is a balance that needs to be struck. No one is saying that they shouldn't report the unemployment numbers or ignore the negative stuff. And I don't agree that the media was blamed for not reporting on the intelligence surround 9/11 and Bush, that was a very tricky situation. They weren't afriad of being negative, they were afraid because the President made it seem like it was a case of national security. As soon as they decided it wasn't, the flood gates opened up! No, I think that there is nothing wrong with covering the unemployment numbers but following that up by talking about job interviewing skills or industries that are still hiring. Talk about the 401k losses and stock market struggles but also tell people what steps they can take to protect themselves and maybe cover how people have put saving at the top of their list again. Its good to cover foreclosures and home loss but why not shine a light on the banks that aren't negotiating with people and put some pressure on them to step up to the plate.
Negativity for negativity's sake (just to sell papers) is just as stupid as pretending nothing bad ever happens.
01.27.09
I'm skeptical about the "reports from journalists that they are under strict directives to stick to the bad news". Where did you get such information?
01.27.09
@Scott M: A reporter and friend of mine confided that the new newsroom mandate was to stick to the negative.
01.27.09
This is the point I made last week but I took it a step further, actually, depending on your political stance you might be feeding into it.
http://chrisspoliticalthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/01/stocks-are-down-econ...
01.27.09
The job of journalists, in my opinion, is to report news, the real news, the news that affects us, and to report it accurately. The point of pundits is to opine on that real news and thuse spin it in whicever direction is theirs or their networks. It is up to people to know the difference.
Journalists/media should not have the job of directing the mood of the country, they are not corporations - where spinning things in s certain light will fool employees into thinking things are better than they are. As we clearly saw with Iraq some spin doesn't work in the face of the truth.
It's just as wrong and misguided to
for media outlets such as FOX to specifically gear their news (in the case of the new administration) toward the negative,just as disturbing when others might gear it solely toward the positive. News should just be accurate.
01.27.09
Something to remember is that journalists are a skeptical bunch (this is a good thing). So they tend to buck the trend and find the story that isn't being reported. If everyone wants to hear good news, they are going to tell you the bad news. But if everyone is unanimous in their agreement that something is bad, then the journalists are going to be skeptical and look for the other side of the story.
Having said that, it is true that news is a business these days, and the consumer (that's YOU and ME) end to pay for negative news more than positive news.
So the next time you complain about the "if it bleeds, it leads" mentality, stop and ask yourself if you would have picked up that paper, or stopped at that TV channel, or perused that website, if the story had been more upbeat.
Got Something To Say?
Got Something To Say?
Not a Member? Brazen Careerist is a career management tool for next-generation professionals. Set up a free account today to comment on this post and start sharing your ideas. Learn more.
Login to view your networks!
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
