The paper describes ethical issues involved in the work of a TV journalist. The author – an experienced editor and producer of TV programs – diagnoses the. etyka dziennikarska zadania mediów: role jakie powinny pełnić media epołeczeńetwie reguluje prawo prasowe. wolność to eytuacja kiedy władza. Title, Etyka dziennikarska. Author, Jan Pleszczyński. Publisher, Difin, ISBN, , Length, pages. Export Citation, BiBTeX.
|Published (Last):||17 July 2015|
|PDF File Size:||7.42 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||7.8 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
In large part, the schizophrenic treatment of journalism drives from a persistent gravitation toward group think. One presumes too much independence, one presumes very little independence. On the way to establishing consensus, individuals favoring competing insights battle over definitions, terms of reference and boundaries of inclusion and exclusion.
Are mobile phones and cameras bona fide instruments of newsmaking? In servicing the public interest by better connecting journalism scholarship and journalism, we hearken back to something Dzienni,arska Dewey said long ago about education: But we can only do so if we reinvigorate our scholarly lenses enough to dzifnnikarska journalists new ways of regarding their role in servicing the public interest.
Regardless of whether that plays out, we need additional forums for bringing journalists and journalism scholars together — journals publishing them side by side, forums in which they interact on common issues, platforms in which they carry on investigative and scholarly work together.
Disciplines come to play in this regard among journalism scholars, where historians, sociologists, political scientists, linguists and cultural analysts all remain in isolated pockets from each other, but dzoennikarska need to mention too how separated are our curricular sequences by medium. How much does the world of journalism education reflect that of journalism?
For instance, how much research begins by exerting itself as an antidote to notions of neutral, objective, impartial journalism? Why have we not been able to do more in facilitating more continuous regard for it? Underlying the ability to speak about journalism, then, are tensions about who can mobilize the right to speak over others. They include how we think about journalism, where we might have gone wrong in its study and teaching, what journalism scholarship can tell us about journalism that it has not offered so far, and how can that exchange better serve the public interest.
Dziennikarz Niezależny? Etyka dziennikarska w praktyce
Each of these three points orient backward rather than forward, paralleling in scholarship the reactivity we see emerging so acutely in journalists themselves. Not only does this reference comparative journalism in its many permutations, but it orients us to the tensions linking journalism in each location to what goes on at its boundaries. Just two weeks ago, a new report by Michael Schudson and Leonard Downie argued for alternative modes of funding journalism — philanthropy, universities, non profits, government.
What would be left in the end, and how much of it would we recognize? So as a system of knowledge, journalism scholarship is uniquely poised to remind journalism to do two basic things. We continue to treat multi-platform stories and multi-media journalism as if they are curiosities rather than evolutionary necessities. What is it about journalism that sets such divergent reactions in motion? In assuming that journalism is dynamic and constantly evolving?
While journalists tend to inhabit the news beat, the news organization, or, if you will, the newsroom whatever we mean by that termscholars are well-poised to remind them to keep abreast of other institutional, social, cultural, political, technological and economic impulses awash in their environment.
We instead insist on demarcations as if they have some real status recognizable in the world. This suggests that journalism scholarship constitutes a valuable linch-pin between journalism and its aspirations to service the public sphere. It offers the tools through which to stead journalism against political attacks which lack historical understanding, to help it better contextualize commercial onslaughts, to offset the hysteria of moral panics which dziennikaeska new technological developments as changing old relationships between young and old or private and public.
But it started long dzienbikarska that. And what is dziennikarwka for — is its function to only provide information or to more creatively meld community and public citizenship? And how has this affected its capacity to serve the public interest?
Where would history be without journalism?
Journalism is too important to be reactive. Implicit here is the fact that journalists need to listen more to academics and minimize their sensitivity to criticisms that academics wield.
Journalism scholarship can teach journalists not to overgeneralize from a small number of cases, to consider events and issues incrementally, and to read. Making such assumptions diverts our attention from the necessary patterning in evolutionary models of journalistic practice, which are nearly always framed in conjunction with that which came before and often in etjka very novel ways.
This has produced stubborn enclaves not only across each of the three populations but within them as well. Each development can and should be explained by looking beyond the here moments targeted by journalism, and it is our responsibility to help journalists recognize them as relevant. Longstanding members of the profession have maintained durable bonds that exclude multiple kinds of newcomers — such as satiricists or bloggers.
History relentlessly repeats itself: And so the defining feature of journalism has faded to the background of what is necessary to know. Does journalism not lie somewhere in between? I want to identify three ways in which this tendency undermines a fuller understanding of how journalism serves the public interest. Many of the starting points, end points and arguments connecting them feel familiar even when they are first broached.
They live in an environment in which economic imperatives and bottom-line pressures force the news to act as a for-profit enterprise, and so journalists are diversified, multi-tasking and multi-skilling in ways that previous generations would not recognize.
Rather, I suggest we need to tweak journalismchanging it from a community that struggles to sidestep blows as they are launched into one that anticipates as much as it responds. Why have we not yet put that notion to bed? First, our scholarly and pedagogic work has narrowed the varieties of news still primarily defining it in ways that drive a specific form of hard news over other alternatives.
So new by whose standards? In other words, journalism scholarship can and should provide journalists with a wealth of accessible knowledge against which to situate their practice, but we need more forums in which to make that happen.
And for whose aims? What does this mean for journalism? Is the narrative journalism of today so very different from the literary experiments of Mark Twain? When we factor in the online environment and further yet the multi-skilling that forces journalists to learn to produce multiple platforms for one news story, we begin to realize that journalism has in fact begun to reflect real world experience more than ever before.
This means we engage with what is up close without taking account of variance introduced at the margins of our inquiry.
Is the online explosion so very different from the expansion into radio in the s? Though news practice takes on unique shape in the various regions in which it is practiced, the vast majority of scholarship still focuses on journalism in its U. Although journalism has been around for as long as publics have needed mediated information about the larger world, journalism itself experiences a schizophrenic existence with the world.