Proportionality & Comprehensiveness

In our readings from Principles of Journalism the underlying basis of Proportionality and Comprehensiveness is explained with the analogy of a map that helps readers find their way through today's society. By keeping articles in proportion and highlighting the important matters of society these principles of journalism act as cornerstones of truthfulness. By inflating certain situations and neglecting others news can either broaden or blur the map. In order to keep the map in appropriate proportion our news must cover stories of all demographics not just the ones that seem attractive and appealing.

But as consumers of news do we really pick up the newspaper in order to find our way to a specific destination as we would a map? Do we as readers really want to know about the things we are not interested in? When reading a map we pay attention to specific details that will help us arrive at a specific destination without conflict. I know that personally, when I pick up a paper I am not necessarily looking for directions for my journey through society. This leads to the question of whether or not news has simply become more a form of entertainment rather than that of a guide through society.

As stated, these principles are supposed to be a piece of foundation for truth. So how exactly should we as journalists use these principles of proportionality and comprehensiveness in order to best inform the public? I believe that by reporting the most important news in the most efficient and comprehensive way possible we can achieve this cornerstone of truth. By paying close attention to and balancing demographics, as well control over hype, and an appeal to a broad audience Journalists can more fully inform and empower their audience.

Evolution.

The power of Digital and Social media on our daily lives is limitless and abounding daily. Never in the history of the world would anyone have believed that you could post, tweet or blog about something and literally milliseconds later share it with the entire world. No longer do we need to carry around a walk-men, cell phone, laptop, and books. We simply pull out our iPhone and have each of these "essentials" at the touch of our fingertips. Our media intake is no longer limited to local or even national events. The international spectrum of media interaction is available to each of us anytime we feel the need to inform or be informed. Each of us know exactly what we want to read, hear, and listen to. We also know where to find it and how to share it with others. With almost all Social and Digital Media we as readers or receivers also have the opportunity to be the producers, therefore filling our need to be a part of an active audience.

As partakers of this Media Evolution we each have media induced rituals in which we very rarely ever stray. Whether it's checking facebook or twitter every morning before class, or picking up the New York Times on your way into the office every day we each have specific outlets and ways in which we choose to be informed about the events occurring all around us. In doing so, do we become biased towards the specific media outlets we chose to partake of? And do those Media outlets sway our daily actions and decisions? When considering these question I don't necessarily think the media tell us what to think, but more so they offer us with specific ideals to think about. In the end does this sway us one way or the other? I do not know. But I do know that as our ability to receive social and digital media continues to increase, the possibilities to these questions are endless and ever changing.....

What is Journalism?

The main focus of our class discussions has seemingly been based on the question "What is Journalism?" To be honest this question got my brain ticking. What do I personally view as journalism? Who do I believe are journalists? And what makes them so? Interestingly enough I had never really asked myself these questions. I had always grouped "journalists" into the association of people who write for media purposes, and quite literally live to write. Growing up I placed journalists in the metaphorical and easily remembered group of 'Louise Lane/Clark Kent' reporters of sorts, who risked their lives for captivating and thrilling stories. As I progressed through school like most others I came to realize the real meaning behind actual Journalism aside from theatrical perceptions, but as I did so I don't think I ever truly defined Journalism for myself. Over the last few weeks and through our classroom discussions I've sorted through my childhood perceptions and thrown aside many errant thoughts in order to come to this conclusion..... For some Journalism is easily defined, but in my mind Journalism is constantly changing. Journalism today is not what it was 30 years ago and 5 years from now it could be complete different. This may be the beauty of Journalism, yet it could very possibly be it's own demise. Our world and society is ever changing with the discovery of new technology and digital programs almost daily. As our world continues to change so do those who populate it. With changes comes a necessity to provide for unseen needs and demands. Today we can email, blog, tweet, facebook and even provide our personal feedback at the touch of a button. We no longer need anyone's approval to publish something online for all to see. Yet does this destroy the credibility and legitimacy of Journalism as a whole? To this I have no exact answer, my only hope is that as each of us hold the keys of modern technology at our very fingertips we will simply remember that with opportunities also comes responsibility.