Stand up for Journalism on Nov 5 July 4, 2007
Posted by martincloake in day of action, ethics, journalism, London Magazine Branch.add a comment
There’s an international day of action in defence of quality journalism on Nov 5. Magazine branch should have input into it. Hence this discussion.
Often, when the NUJ campaigns on issues of quality journalism, the terms used and issued coveres heavily reflect the way news reporters work. This is partly because the NUJ has traditionally been strongest in newpapers and broadcasting. But it also may be because many mag journalists find it hard to identify with these campaigns – like ‘Journalism Matters’ for eg. So we need to take ownership of the campaign as it relates to mag journalists – in the business and consumer sectors. And also to make it reflect the concerns of people like designers who, unlike in newspapers, are considered integral parts of the editorial team.
There aren’t any right or wrong answers, but there are some questions we could discuss.
• How does quality relate to the consumer arena? Clearly members on Heat and Pick Me Up don’t have the same problems and pressures as a local paper news desk denied resources to report their community – but there will be issues.
• Should we concentrate on pay and conditions instead of professional issues, or would we be missing a trick?
• Is ‘convergence’ the big issue for our sector, with its problems of multi or de-skilling etc.
This has gone on far too long for an initial post, but it’s just intended to kick things off. Over to the blogosphere!
US news anchor direct action July 2, 2007
Posted by martincloake in ethics, journalism.1 comment so far
Has everyone seen the Mika Brzezinski footage from the American news show Morning Joe in which she repeatedly refuses to read a scripted news lead on Paris Hilton, saying it wasn’t news on a day when important Iraq news was breaking. It’s become a bit of a YouTube phenomenon, but it raises some very interesting questions. What do people think? Are there lessons for us? Would some people argue that Mika has ‘compromised her impartiality’ by expressing the opinion she has?
It would be good to get some discussion going on this – although it’s possible many of the people who say they want to discuss professional issues are too busy discussing the issues they think we shouldn’t be discussing to, er, discuss them. But we live in hope.
