He said-she said journalism—versus what’s really going on here?
There’s a fundamental difference between U.S. and British journalism. Americans are taught in Journalism 101 to report rather than interpret, and to put people’s words in direct quotes—a lot of he saids, she saids. Brits tend to take a more interpretive and narrative approach—and I’m talking here about the news page, not the editorials or op-eds. For years, the superiority of he said—she said journalism with lots of direct quotes went pretty much unquestioned—(the New York Times as the newspaper of record and all that). But it’s time for a rethink.
Who’s speaking and won’t own up to it—and why are they doing that?
You have all those unattributed sources. . .A high ranking official in the state department, etc., said Mr. Bush prefers black coffee to regular. In other words, we don’t even know who the he saids, she saids are anymore. So how much weight do these respective opinions carry—and why are they reluctant to go on record? Because it’s important? Because they don’t want to get nailed? Because they’re leaking? Because they’re supposed to clear everything with Karl Rove?
You have handlers, staying on message, scripted press conferences and tightly formatted presidential debates in which both journalists and candidates are urged to throw softballs.
A lot of stories tend to read like dueling press releases, with all the players doing CYA moves. It makes for dull as well as confusing journalism
In Britain, there is a weekly question time, in which members of the opposition party ask tough—often politicized and potentially embarrassing questions of the party-in-power—including p-i-p leader Tony Blair. In our country the press is supposed to perform that function, but for a whole bunch of reasons, lately they’ve been off their game. Chalk it up to a Washington press corp that fears not getting admitted to the political inner sanctum any more. Helen Thomas, after all, is pointedly ignored at Bush press conferences. Corporate ownership of the media doesn’t help. And then there’s the notion, particularly prevalent since 911, that asking questions or criticizing the powers that be borders on treason. Do libel laws play a part in all this? I must confess I don’t know.
12:26:45 AM 
|
|
