Does Political Journalism Represent the Public Interest - Literature review Example

Does Political Journalism Represent the Public Interest? Student Name Instructor Name Course University Date of submission Does Political Journalism Represent the Public Interest? Introduction Even though journalism was at one time the appendix of the society, today, culture is at the mercy of journalism. This has become the norm of a world dominated by the media and journalism. Mass media and other forms of media don’t only decide what and who will be known, but also the degree to which they will be known and within which interpretive context. The question arising, therefore, is to what extent does political journalism represent the public interest; especially in the context of Australia. Serving public interest has always been an elusive pursuit for the media especially in political reporting (Weaver et al 2006). Owing to the rarity of public interest being profitable for media houses, it is often sacrificed when profit rests in the hands of those whose focus is not public interest. On the other hand, the public interest may clash with other journalistic responsibilities such as ethical reporting forcing the media to make a decision to exclude or tone down on certain news items expected by the public. Journalists make decisions about what defines and the right of the public to know the truth and keeping the nation cohesive through slanted reporting. Political reporting can either be focused on making conclusions and give it to the public, or giving the public the facts and allowing them to make their own conclusions (Renner & Lynch). Politics is particularly sensitive and reporting politics is always slanted toward a particular issue or a particular side, while other political issues are suppressed. The decisions made on political reporting are grounded in ethical decision making or a code of ethics. The dawn of technology has brought out a new form of media - Political journalism that does not necessarily wait for news to appear on the news, but rather gets news before mainstream broadcasting corporations. Professional hackers and journalists are participating in forms of journalism that resemble whistle blowing (Aldridge & Evetts 2003, pp. 547-564). Many journalists hold the belief that the public has a right to know the truth and that there is need to illuminate the corruption and vices that dwell in political circles. It is often the hope of media houses that this need will supersede other news considerations (Vallone & Lee Ross 1985, pp. 577-585). However, it is often that this light does not focus on corruption or vices, but on the lives of individuals whose lives have been shaken by newsworthy events. In addition, this illumination may also focus on particular events in a public individual’s private life that is seen to have a negative effect on their ability to work. Body Technological revolution The 20th century has seen the evolution of technology which has in turn created conditions, which make individual privacy a concern (McNair 1999, pp 73-90). Mass media has grown exponentially aided by the information revolution. Australia’s case is particularly unique owing to the emergence of wiki-leaks. This has made Australia the epicentre of WikiLeaks because the face of hacking and leaking information is from Australia. With the proliferation of whistle blowing and the power to share information literally on people’s hands, the comprehension of the right to privacy has shrunk such that it is subject to definition and analysis through discussion and experience. Public interest is one of the elements used to justify putting private issues and individuals in the limelight (Barendt et al 1997). Hence, making an event the subject of public interest may allow the exploitation of private issues by the media. This has affected political reporting in Australia with journalists using events in private life to highlight the mediocrity of politicians while politicians lambast the media for their sensationalist and adversarial approach (Wilson, 2014) Due to the many significant differences in the context of Australian legal, social and political processes and their structures, the process of mediazation is not as entrenched as it is in other societies. Australian journalists believe that giving news on the private lives of political figures is technically out of bounds unless the story being broadcast bears directly on a matter that is critical to the public interest (Barendt et al. 1997). However, this can change owing to the competitive demands and pressures for an increase in the speed of reporting and gathering news stories. There are more news channels and more media houses producing newspapers which adds pressure and makes it so that journalists have started looking for news from varying sources even when it may not be necessarily be of public interest. On one hand, the trend of reporting on the private lives of politicians represents an erosion of professional journalistic standards (Aldridge & Evetts 2003, pp. 547-564). Consequently, there is a tendency to publish such information without concern for the purpose it serves; whether it is informative or political. The appropriate role of these character coverage in election news has been a subject of controversy, especially in recent elections. Consequently, the 21st century has seen the growth of concern about treating people ethically when portraying their private lives in public light (Mathews & Brown 2012, pp. 802-817. There is also a negative impact that the media has on the attitude the nation has toward truth, knowledge, work and a civil society. Research studies have linked the content of news and other media programs and aggression, apathy and celebrity obsession which occupy the agenda of most households (Flynn 2006, pp. 256–73). This is complicated even more by the fact that users of information do not just listen to it anymore, they also create news. Communication has been decentralized by technology and the internet and it is more personal and participatory (Mathews & Brown 2012, pp. 802-817. The passive consumption of news has been replaced by the creation and consumption of news sometimes to the extent of customizing news. That which may be considered public interest by one individual may not be so to another individual. An individual’s revolution may be another’s coup d’etat. Even though Australia’s largest media houses and outlets are still dominant, the models they have established are under tremendous strain. The current media in Australia has not being mistaken, but rather is a consequence of good and bad decisions, polities and political ideologies. According to Wilson (2014), the monopoly of mainstream media on public affairs and debates has given way to discord. Social media has weakened political reporting by weakening the ability that leaders have to establish and carry opinions (Wilson, 2014). The power of media has shifted from the top ad the elite and is not concentrated in numerous individuals downwards. The role of reporting on politics is primarily linked to the watchdog role of the media. Neil Levy (2002) argues that journalists should not be frowned upon for using deception and entrapment to ensure they fulfil their watchdog role. He suggests that it would be advisable to engage in this practice for the good of the public. Fulfilling the watchdog involves providing information to the public that will allow them to participate actively in political processes. Making informed political decisions is essential if the society is to grow effectively. Other than that, the media also inform the public on power abuses perpetrated by those with political power (Mathews & Brown 2012, pp. 802-817). This does not only help in informing the public, but also in reforming the system and political decision making. For instance, once people know that a presidential candidate has skeletons in his closet, they will not vote for him. Levy (2002) argues that the watchdog role also gives journalists the right to engage in sting operations and set up politicians in order to discover the truth about particular issues in the nation. The fourth estate role of the media involves investigating official ad institutional corruption. Hence, the watchdog role gives political journalists in Australia the moral right for the media to engage in entrapment. It is also a necessary thing to carry out if the media is to ameliorate the effects of corruption in Australia. Human sources News audiences and journalists all depend on news sources to get background stories as well as information that interests them. Human resources have emerged as one of the most enticing sources, but also as the most manipulative. Most investigative journalists are dependent on human sources to verify stories and new leads. These sources will likely be anonymous or confidential, but some may be identified in public (Norris 2001, pp. 233-254). As mentioned above, recent years have seen the emergence of technology led whistleblowers such as WikiLeaks, who have pioneered new ways of acquiring, proving and disseminating information which also protects confidentiality and anonymity (Hastings 2008). Political journalism occupies the most airspace and news related to politics is often brought to the public to allow them make their own conclusions. As such, whistle-blowing – in whichever form it manifests – is the process of revealing in depth information about any form of wrongdoing to authorities or people with the ability to take action on it. This has affected political journalism by providing journalists with more human sources ready to reveal wrong doing (Hastings 2008). Even the fact that the information is out there is sometimes enough to ensure that changes follow. In this context, wrongdoing is when an organization or person does things that are dishonest, unlawful, dangerous and unjust. These acts of wrongdoings are often related to politics in one way or another since it is the government and government officials who have engaged in questionable action (Flynn 2006, pp. 256-73). Public interest, whistle blowing is concerned with identifying wrongdoings that affect the interests of the public. In this case, political journalism will be addressing public interest, especially if they engage in investigative reporting to give the public more information on the issue at hand (Kelly 2014). This type of reporting is characterized by a serious nature and is significant enough that people consider the news may cause harm to the interests of an organization or the people. Leakers are the lifeline of journalists. They often offer undisclosed information that has not yet been authorized by official channels. As such, political journalism is now privy to more information that has not yet been rehearsed or structured (Hastings 2008). Official channels tend to skew information to meet their own needs. Leakers have increasingly been working through citizen journalists such as online bloggers on Facebook and twitter. Different leakers have different motives, including whistle blowers and tactical political gain (Smith & Brown 2008). The recent case of Edward Snowden is a typical case of a whistleblower who hopes that a particular wrong doing will stop. Even though this may be of interest to the public, there are issues that the individual engaging in whistle blowing considers to be wrong and the rest of the world may not agree with him. For instance, even though Snowden revealed that the NSA (National Security Agency) was illegally monitoring people’s phones, some consider this a necessary step if terrorism, gang related crimes and other challenging crime elements are to be combated effectively. On the other hand, tactical leaking may be related to using the information as a means of discrediting others such as when a rival campaign team leaks damaging information about their rivals (Lester & Hutchins 2012, pp. 654-667). Leaking puts the power of political journalism in the hands of individuals through something that Joan Didion (1988) calls “the process”. The process gives everyone the opportunity to participate in the creation and dissemination of political news. Consequently, political journalists in Australia are bolder about revealing sensitive information because they know it is in the hands of the public already. Laurie Oakes, a veteran Australian journalist suggested that leakers end up serving the public interest regardless of their motivations (2010). This is because they contribute to free journalism. Being the first one with significant news is the essence of journalism. Whistle blowers are more likely to have valuable information which is also regarded as newsworthy are, they are also likely to protect their identities with greater effort than tactical leakers. It should be noted that the dawn of technology and the internet has made it so that the majority of whistle blowing does not involve mainstream media (Lester & Hutchins 2012, pp. 654-667). Most whistle-blowers’ use the internet from whence the media picks up the story and explores it further. The culture of whistleblowing has changed the nature of political journalism by making mainstream media framers. Since information is available on the internet and anyone can use the internet to disseminate information, mainstream media works by providing a context for what people already know. As such, they frame the news. It is likely that whistle blowers will give information to the element that does not pose any threat to their cause. For instance, if there is corruption at work, the report may go to their supervising manager. But if they suspect that the manager is involved in the corrupt deals, they will go higher to the CEO. The range of channels through which people inform the public change depending on the nature of the situation. Turning to the media is often a last resort when the whistle blower feels like there is no other option for them, but to use the media (Schudson 2000). The media is a very public affair and may be scary to individuals as it may require them to be in the face of the public. Some of the biggest and most memorable stories around the world come from whistleblowers. These stories are not just there for entertainment, but they also serve the public interest by revealing wrong doing and safety failures that affect the society thereby protecting the society from these same vices (Beecher 2011). Among the most memorable stories in Australia is the case of Dr. Death, where Toni Hoffman, a manager of an intensive care unit revealed to the country that one of the surgeons Jayant M. Patel was responsible for the deaths. The scandal that rocked Queensland was only brought to light after Hoffman’s concerns about his colleague were made public. Following this, a commission of inquiry was set up and this led to the discovery that there were over 80 deaths in the hospital linked to this particular surgeon (Mancuso, 2005). The Bundaberg base hospital was investigated and Dr. Patel was sentenced to 7 years in prison. None of this would have happened without the whistle blower. Whistleblowing and leaking information has also changed public perception of political journalism. Before, most political journalism was thought to be in support of the corrupt but with the stories that have emerged with whistleblowing, political journalism is viewed more positively by the public. Whistle blowing does not always involve only highlighting what another individual did wrong, but also pointing out what the whistle blower did (Kelly 2014). Snowden was part of the team that designed software used to monitor individuals. Among the most popular of these stories is the my lai massacre of the Vietnam war. The story not only revealed wrong doing on the part of the whistle blower but also on the part of his superiors and colleagues. This happened in 1969 when the Vietnam war was at its worst. Paul Meadlo, a US soldier, told Seymour Hersch – an investigative journalist – about how he and his fellow soldiers went on a rampage in Vietnam and murdered more than 100 men women and children in cold blood (Hersch 1977, 294-8). The massacre was so devastating that the events that followed its revelation resulted in the end of the Vietnam war. When the soldiers were coppered into the village, they expected to find enemies, but instead, there were just villagers. Army second lieutenant then told the soldiers to push everyone in a ditch and shoot them (Hersch 1977, 294-8). The lieutenant was eventually convicted of war crimes. Political journalism has had a greater effect on political policy changes by exposing the flaws of current policies. The whistle blowing shed light on some of the questionable military training conditions, as well as establishing ethical rules of engagement to follow when engaged in combat. Effects of whistleblowing Understanding the motive behind whistle blowing is essential to ensuring that public interest is represented in a useful manner. In the case of Vietnam, the soldier seemed eager to reveal the wrong doing (Hersch 1977, 294-8). This motive is the most common among whistle blowers. Other motives include revenge and other incentives such as cash and political gain (Weaver et al 2006). Political journalists have become more rigorous in screening their sources reducing the chances of mistakes. There are more sources through the internet forcing journalists to screen the political motives of these individuals before disseminating a story. If the journalist understands the motive behind the whistle blower’s intentions, they will be in a better position to determine if their sources can be trusted or not. This is particularly important when reporting on public interest issues since the public will be more drawn to media sources that have proved to be truthful (Cottle 2003). Therefore, having a trustworthy source is essential in order to determine the accuracy of information as well as the risk of possessing and revealing this information. Perhaps one of the most unpredictable issues when dealing with political journalism is deciding on revealing particular types of information (Beecher 2011). Revealing information could put innocent lives in danger and may also result in the loss of lives. The inflammatory nature of a particular political revelation has the potential to cause more harm than good. Therefore, the decision is not just about what will be revealed but also how it will be revealed. Political journalism in the Australian context works both for the public interest as well as for commercial gain. When journalists report on private lives, this is mostly deemed as the pursuit of commercial gain and sensationalism and not necessarily for public interest. Technology has had both positive and negative effects on reporting for public interest (Smith & Brown 2008). On one hand, mainstream journalists have had to report more public interest stories in order to be representative of the news that is already on the internet. Technology has made it harder for people to hide their communication trails. In addition, it also makes it harder for journalists to hide their sources, especially if the information is on the internet (Kenyon 2006). This gives whistle blowers a wide field to look for information and support, but it also puts them at greater risk. Living in cynical times, it is important to verify information that is being put out to the public. The interest is not just on giving information, but on giving verifiable information. One of the first things that people do as soon as they get new information is to look it up on the internet to see if it is true. However, the media – especially the Australian media – has been evolving to a more ethical and professional practice that is dynamic and changes according to the changing times (Aldridge & Evetts 2003, p. 547-564). This genuine will to act in an ethical manner that will cause no harm to individuals is guided by the public’s right to know the truth while also engaging in sensitive reporting. Public interest should be a guiding principle as well as fundamental framework for democracy as well as a challenge to preserve allegiance to it. Having observed this in the Australian context, it is impossible to ignore social commentators and observers who decry the tendency of the media to elevate celebrity culture and to pander to prurient curiosity (Chesterman 2000). This results in the exclusion of other news that is more valuable to audience as this is required for individuals to make informed decisions in the 21st century. As such, drawing a line between the right of the public to know and the privacy of individuals is an activity that journalists engage in each day with every news item they come across. Every situation that a journalist comes across each day is different in its facts and context. Hence, each situation should be assessed based on its own merits, demerits along with a combination of journalistic code of conduct, ethics, knowledge, values and individual conscience. Conclusion and recommendations Despite the good intentions of numerous journalists and executives in the media, there are still inadvertent and unethical decisions that are made on the news. The pressure to get latest news has increased competitive rates resulting in unethical news reporting practices. Media executives as well as the public prefer if private reporting on private individuals stops. Competition and pressure are among the major threats to journalistic ethics (Cottle 2003). The task for political journalism, therefore, is finding incentives for unhurried judgment and cam refection which hold as much power as competitive pressures that steer journalists toward unthinking reporting (Didion 2001). These incentives should not be material, but rather internal. Internal incentives have been found to be more effective in ensuring ethical political journalism. External incentives have the opposite effect of attaching monetary value to reporting indicating that journalists can be bought which will degrade journalistic integrity further. Political journalism has benefited from the current Australian context by providing them with more sources, helping them expose corrupt practices and strengthening journalistic integrity and ethics. In addition, further research needs to be done especially in the Australian context in order to learn the fundamentals of ethical political reporting. The guideline should not be abstract but spelt out so that all journalists are aware of what they are getting into when engaging in political reporting (Lewis 2010). This should also include reinforcing these rules in all other types of reporting to ensure that adherence to ethic starts early. Solutions for building a stronger media in Australia should be centred on higher standards of journalistic participation, public involvement and media literacy. Efforts directed at fostering media literacy in Australia in this century should start from the education system and more research should be done on whistleblowers. Whistle blowers now occupy one of the top seats as sources in political reporting and their contributions should not be downplayed neither should they be ignored (Marjoribanks & Kenyon 2003, 31-49.). The internet means that if the media is not a channel for getting their message across, then they will find other ways of getting their information out to the public. People – and not only journalists – need to know about what happens when news is gathered and hoe the –priorities are set to focus on particular issues (Didion 2001). In addition, mainstream media should cover political issue that reflect the country’s past, present and future. Rather than just focusing on scandals, there should be news on how people can change the political scene as well as informative news that will keep the citizenry updated on the best possible decisions. If people know how they can change the political scene, then they will strive to make it better. Another group that should not be forgotten in political reporting are the police. They are a big part of public interest; as such, they should be a big part of the media’s agenda. List of References Aldridge, M & Evetts, J 2003, ‘Rethinking the Concept of Professionalism: the Case of Journalism’, British Journal of Sociology vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 547-564 Barendt, E, Lustgarten, L, Norrie, K, & Stephenson, H 1997, Libel and the Media: The Chilling Effect, Oxford: Clarendon Press. Beecher, E 2011, ‘Beecher: Media Inquiry has mandate to address problems” Crikey 16 September 2011: http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/1132_crikey.pdf  Brown, AJ, Latimer P, McMillan J & Wheeler, C 2008, ‘Towards Best Practice Whistleblowing Legislation for the Public Sector: The Key Principles’, in A.J. Brown, ed., Whistleblowing in the Australian Public Sector: Enhancing the Theory and Practice of Internal Witness Management in Public Sector Organisations, Canberra: ANU E-Press Chesterman, M 2000, Freedom of Speech in Australian Law: A Delicate Plant, Aldershot: Ashgate. Calland, R. & Dehn, G., eds. 2004, Whistleblowing Around the World: Law, Culture & Practice, London: Public Concern At Work Cottle, S (ed) 2003, Media Organisation and Production, London, Sage Didion, J 1988, Insider Baseball, The New Yorker, http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1988/oct/27/insider-baseball/?pagination=false Didion, J 2001, Political Fictions, New York: Vintage Books. Flynn, K 2006, ‘Covert Disclosures: Unauthorized Leaking, Public Officials and the Public Sphere’, Journalism Studies, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 256–73 Hastings, M 2008, Hack: Confessions of a Presidential Campaign Reporter, GQ, October 2008: http://www.gq.com/news-politics/big-issues/200810/michael-hastings-newsweek-presidential-campaign  Hersch, S.M. 1977, The My Lai Massacre Uncovered’, in L.R. Obst, ed., The Sixties, New York: Random House/Rolling Stone Press, pp. 294–8 Kelly, P 2014. Politics in crisis and a nation in denial, The Australian, 2 July 2014.  http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/politics-in-crisis-and-a-nation-in-denial/story-e6frg74x-1226974255262 Kenyon, AT 2006, Defamation: Comparative Law and Practice, Abingdon: University College London Press. Lester, L & Hutchins, B 2012, Soft journalism, politics and environmental risk: An Australian story, Journalism: Theory, Practice and Criticism, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 654-667 Levy, N 2002, In Defence of Entrapment in Journalism (and Beyond), Journal of Applied Philosophy, vol. 19, no. 2, pp.121-130. Lewis, D., ed. 2010, A Global Approach to Public Interest Disclosure, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Marjoribanks, T and Kenyon, AT 2003, ‘Negotiating news: Journalistic practice and defamation law in Australia and the US’, Australian Journalism Review vol. 25 no.2, pp 31-49. McNair, B 1999, The Media as Political Actors, An Introduction to Political Communication, 2nd Ed, London: Routledge. pp73-90. Matthews, J & Brown, A 2012, Negatively shaping the asylum agenda? The representational strategy and impact of a tabloid news campaign, Journalism: Theory, Practice and Criticis, vol. 13, no. 6. pp 802-817 Norris, P 2001, Cares Less? Cynical Media, Cynical Public?” A Virtuous Circle: Political Communications in Post-industrial Societies, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp 233-254 Oakes, L 2010, On the Record: Politics, Politicians and Power, Sydney: Hachette Australia Schudson, M 2000, the Sociology of News Production Revisited (Again)’, in James Curran and Michael Gurevitch (eds), Mass Media and Society, third edition, London: Arnold Renner, T & Lynch, G P, “A Little Knowledge is a Dangerous Thing: What we know about the role of the media in state politics”, In Mark J Rozell & Jeremy D Mayer (eds) Media Power, Media Politics 2nd Ed, New York: Rowman & Littlefied Publishers Inc. pp137-155 Smith, R & Brown, AJ 2008,‘The Good, The Bad and The Ugly: Whistleblowing Outcomes’, in A.J. Brown, ed., Whistleblowing in the Australian Public Sector: Enhancing the Theory and Practice of Internal Witness Management in Public Sector Organisations, Canberra: Australia & New Zealand School of Government/ANU E-Press, Canberra. Vallone, RP, Lee Ross; MRL 1985, The hostile media phenomenon: Biased perception and perceptions of media bias in coverage of the Beirut massacre, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 49, no. 3, pp. 577-585. Weaver, RL, Kenyon, AT, Partlett, DF & Walker, CP 2006, The Right to Speak Ill: Defamation, Reputation and Free Speech, Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press. Wilson, J 2014, Why cry over the return of populist politics? It's an opportunity!, 18 July 2014, Guardian Australia. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/18/why-cry-over-the-return-of-populist-politics-its-an-opportunity Read More

Hence, making an event the subject of public interest may allow the exploitation of private issues by the media. This has affected political reporting in Australia with journalists using events in private life to highlight the mediocrity of politicians while politicians lambast the media for their sensationalist and adversarial approach (Wilson, 2014) Due to the many significant differences in the context of Australian legal, social and political processes and their structures, the process of mediazation is not as entrenched as it is in other societies.

Australian journalists believe that giving news on the private lives of political figures is technically out of bounds unless the story being broadcast bears directly on a matter that is critical to the public interest (Barendt et al. 1997). However, this can change owing to the competitive demands and pressures for an increase in the speed of reporting and gathering news stories. There are more news channels and more media houses producing newspapers which adds pressure and makes it so that journalists have started looking for news from varying sources even when it may not be necessarily be of public interest.

On one hand, the trend of reporting on the private lives of politicians represents an erosion of professional journalistic standards (Aldridge & Evetts 2003, pp. 547-564). Consequently, there is a tendency to publish such information without concern for the purpose it serves; whether it is informative or political. The appropriate role of these character coverage in election news has been a subject of controversy, especially in recent elections. Consequently, the 21st century has seen the growth of concern about treating people ethically when portraying their private lives in public light (Mathews & Brown 2012, pp. 802-817. There is also a negative impact that the media has on the attitude the nation has toward truth, knowledge, work and a civil society.

Research studies have linked the content of news and other media programs and aggression, apathy and celebrity obsession which occupy the agenda of most households (Flynn 2006, pp. 256–73). This is complicated even more by the fact that users of information do not just listen to it anymore, they also create news. Communication has been decentralized by technology and the internet and it is more personal and participatory (Mathews & Brown 2012, pp. 802-817. The passive consumption of news has been replaced by the creation and consumption of news sometimes to the extent of customizing news.

That which may be considered public interest by one individual may not be so to another individual. An individual’s revolution may be another’s coup d’etat. Even though Australia’s largest media houses and outlets are still dominant, the models they have established are under tremendous strain. The current media in Australia has not being mistaken, but rather is a consequence of good and bad decisions, polities and political ideologies. According to Wilson (2014), the monopoly of mainstream media on public affairs and debates has given way to discord.

Social media has weakened political reporting by weakening the ability that leaders have to establish and carry opinions (Wilson, 2014). The power of media has shifted from the top ad the elite and is not concentrated in numerous individuals downwards. The role of reporting on politics is primarily linked to the watchdog role of the media. Neil Levy (2002) argues that journalists should not be frowned upon for using deception and entrapment to ensure they fulfil their watchdog role. He suggests that it would be advisable to engage in this practice for the good of the public.

Fulfilling the watchdog involves providing information to the public that will allow them to participate actively in political processes. Making informed political decisions is essential if the society is to grow effectively. Other than that, the media also inform the public on power abuses perpetrated by those with political power (Mathews & Brown 2012, pp. 802-817).

Read More