How to detect and reject 'Gotcha journalism'
Everyone in Quebec's English media has been talking about Le Journal de Montréal's "investigative" story on the so-called lack of French in downtown Montreal. Most papers have covered it from the angle of language politics, but what it really reveals is a general malaise with journalism in general these days and how certain publications choose to cover a story in order to appeal to a certain type of reader.
Today, more than ever, newspapers and the media in general, are facing an ethical dilemma. On the one hand, journalism is in the business of pointing the reader's attention to what is important and why. On the other hand, tabloid journalism has invaded regular news to such an extent that even reputable news sources are starting to resemble entertainment shows (anyone seen the news on Fox lately?)
Just like human beings have a propensity for sugar and fat, so do they for media fluff, scandals and sensationalistic headlines. "Sorry, I don't speak French" splashed across the front page of a daily French paper, whose readership, to put it mildly, isn't exactly part of the Quebec intelligentsia and has a serious linguistic chip on their shoulder about anything having to do with a potential –real or otherwise- threat to their mother tongue, is sure to attract more attention than a boring old headline about how French is thriving in this province.
Sadly, these days, because the front pages are so often devoted to fluff stories, scandals, celebrity sightings or fearmongering, we confuse what’s important.
The MTV generation has neither the interest nor the patience for political discourse and in-depth analysis of issues, so the media, in an attempt to capture and retain their interest, responds with "gotcha" stories. Sensationalistic and inflammatory by nature, their intent is to provoke, tantalize, frighten, shock and awe. Who cares if they never get around to disseminating any objective information?
The newspaper business is an interesting one. On the one hand, it must be profitable to remain in existence, so managerial decisions are taken daily by publishers to ensure that viability. On the other hand, journalists have a sacred trust and responsibility towards their readership. Ultimately, their loyalty --even more so than to the company that signs their paycheque-- lies with their readers. That trust can't afford to be broken.
One of the most stringent codes of journalistic conduct is reporting without bias. "Gotcha journalism", the deliberate manipulation of the presentation of facts in order to portray a person or organization (or in this case, downtown Montreal's linguistic reality) in a way that varies from an accurate or balanced review of the facts, is highly unethical because it's deliberately biased reporting.
This is why media education is vital for newspaper readers and media watchers. People need to learn to approach news with a discerning and probing mind. Media education isn't about having the right answers, but about having the selective reasoning required to ask the right questions or at least question the questions being asked.
American TV journalist, Sam Donaldson, once remarked that "if you send me to cover a pie-baking contest on Mother's Day, I'd ask dear old Mom why she used artificial sweetener or stole the apples!" As tempting (and as lazy) as it might be, one shouldn't simply make up a sensationalistic story just to appeal to those who have an appetite for one. Sometimes (what a novelty!) your job should consist of nothing more than covering the pie-baking contest.
Deliberate exclusion is a problem too
Steve HartwellArticle online since March 15th 2008
So true. The websites and forums for journalists are full of debate and articles about this ever growing problem. What is also a problem are those who are not even allowed to contribute their opinions, like tobacco smokers. One NEVER sees the opinions of tobacco smokers in the mainstream news, and it's not for lack of trying very hard to get reported. Democracy is a pain, because it is for everybody. Refusing to allow a group to have it's equal say in a Democracy, means there will soon be none for anybody.