User:Stevertigo/?
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Associations among Wikipedians
- AMA
- Inclusionists
- Deletionists
{{
[edit] A heirarchy within the news trade
News anchors are tradesmen-assistants to professional journalists; their fields are complimentary. One investigates the news while the other simply condenses it and repeats it. A reporter fills a role bettween the two, and typically is limited to a very local sphere.
While "mass media" may cover everything from the highest journalism to the lowest propaganda and marketing, the "news trade" is limited generally to elements within mass media that deal with the reporting of news events, whatever "news" and "events" happen to mean. Within that slightly narrower spectrum, we can even lower our standards enough to include gossip "news". We can sort of stick the morning shows somewhere substantially above the gossip news, and somewhere (substantially) below the television newsmagazines, simply because the prior are more personality based, and the latter tend to be more investigative journalism based, though not comparable to many nameless print journalists.
Within the spectrum of newsmagazines, we can sort of say that Dateline outranks 60 minutes in the fluff factor, but 20/20 has Barbara Walters —which dramatically lowers its credibility. Dan Rather's overeagerness for a scoop basically lumps 60 minutes in with the rest of them, and that wraps up that entire category. In terms of journalistic value, the investigative story supercedes by far the simple relaying of "news" which others may (journalists) report on or cameras may happen to capture. -SV|t|add 08:16, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Let Se, N, S, E, B stand for societal effects, news practices, standards, ethics and business, respectively; there can honest disagreement about which is a subset/component of the other. Se ⊂ N ⊂ S ⊂ E ⊂ B might be a cynical way of looking at things, but thats fair
Two: Related templates: I knew someone was going to bring this up, and Im glad that youre doing it rather concisely. Heres my explanation: Journalism is a professional concept, which has within it a number of concepts. The "business side" is in principle distinct from the "professional side", - thats something we dealt with on Journalism ethics and standards, too. The news trade, or news business, is a separate enough concept that it can be of separate focus. Yes, its a fair argument that they are too redundant, but ideally they should not be: the trade template does not need to contain all the secondary or even primary concepts in "journalism," but it should include all the trade aspects which are secondary in trade, but more tertiary to journalism. This is why for example the Marketing Influence section is more minor (hence less filled) than it is on news trade. This strategy has problems: for one, there is a natural tendency to populate templates based on opposite conceptual terms, hence Infotainment though an aspect of the news business than journalism (lets first agree on that) is it also a conceptual term that shows a subordinate relationship to professional journalism, (according to the view that holds journalism superior to entertainment.) I assume you agree that theres a heirarchy of ethics between the two concepts of "profession" and "business" - ie, 'its the doctor who saves your life, not the beaurocrat who manages the hospital' hospitals might be the rare case where one can argue that the business aspect must have ethical concerns, but other contexts, the ethics may be further removed.
