visions of a soul

News Media’s Responsibility in Society:
Is American News Media Socially Responsible?

     The system of government in the United States relies on its citizen’s involvement and care to function properly. To fulfill their obligations to the society in which they live, these citizens must be well-informed to facilitate their making of intelligent decisions. Therefore, the citizens must be able to rely on someone or something to receive their information from – enter the “news media."

     The collective group of people and things which make up what we call the “news media” vary from the every-day journalist, to the radio stations, T.V. stations, newspapers, magazines (not tabloids), and websites they report for. While the medium, method, and content may vary between sources, there is one thing they all share in common – they have a responsibility to those who use them as sources of information. What does this responsibility entail, and (perhaps more importantly) is American news media living up to this responsibility?

     In a speech to students at the Fisher College of Business, Tad Smith gave points of social responsibility news media outlets should hold to for their consumers, part of something he referred to as a, “Code of Commitment.” It is four of these points (and one other) from which I believe we can gather a basis for our understanding of the social responsibility of news media. Any news media outlet should provide information that is unbiased, unadulterated, pertinent, independent, and most importantly truthful (571).

     While we may suffer from a knee-jerk reaction to the idea of a news report not containing bias, assuming (from observation) that the two are inseparable, I would suggest that it is indeed possible to have news without bias. The problem is not that the entity of news and the bias of those in charge of its presentation are inseparable; the problem is in the way we understand news. In recent times, the amount of available “news” has grown exponentially, and with that our definition of what is really news has become distorted (Downie Jr., Kaiser 221). We commonly see “news” as a handful of facts mixed in with a journalist, producer, or manager’s personal bias. While prevalent, this is not what proper news reporting should consist of. Instead, news should be the reporting of facts alone, with personal opinion held to publications where it is expected and appreciated.

     It is also the responsibility of any news media outlet to be sure its news is reported unadulterated or unchanged. While this responsibility ties in with the idea of removing bias, it also has other implications. Facts must be presented as they are, without exaggeration or editing. Aside from that, the facts must actually appear to begin with; they should not be left out to add a “spin” to the story.

     Next, news outlets should be sure that their information is pertinent to their consumers. News about events (locally, nationally, and globally) that impact the life of the listener should be delivered. It should also be a priority that news is delivered as soon as it is available and deemed trustworthy.

     “News media have the responsibility to be an independent chorus in the triad of government, citizens, and journalism” (Elliott 32). Because of the content of news, it is important that these sources of news be independent. They must be independent from not only the government and its citizens, but also they must be independent from one another. This is not to suggest that media outlets should not share information and other things, but instead that one entity should not force its opinions or practices on another. This is an important part of keeping news unbiased and unchanged.

     The most important characteristic news must have is truthfulness. Stories must be checked over carefully and thoroughly to ensure their factualness. Any “news” which does not fulfill this obligation most certainly is not news at all, it is rumor – something best left to institutions whose reputation is not of social concern.

     If a society’s news media are able to have these principles in their reporting, then they are well on their way to fulfilling their responsibility to the society in which they are present. This now leaves us with one question to answer: does the American news media live up to this responsibility? To arrive at a conclusion, let us hold the American news media up to the “light” of the five principals mentioned above.

     Is the American news media unbiased in its reporting?

On January 22nd, 1993, then-President Bill Clinton performed his first executive act since taking office. On ABC News, anchorman Peter Jennings described this event by saying, "President Clinton keeps his word on abortion rights. President Clinton kept a promise today on the 20th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion. Mr. Clinton signed presidential memoranda rolling back many of the restrictions imposed by his predecessors." His praise of the President’s actions was echoed on the other major news networks, such as ABC and CBS; however not all presidents are so praised for their executive decisions.

     Shortly after now-President George W. Bush took office, he repealed a Clinton instituted policy of giving federal funds to international abortion counseling agencies. His first executive action was met with this, much different, statement from Mr. Jennings, “One of the president's first actions was designed to appeal to anti-abortion conservatives. The president signed an order reinstating a Reagan-era policy that prohibited federal funding of family planning groups that provided abortion counseling services overseas.” Once again, this same sentiment was echoed on the other networks. The difference in the phrasing of the reports is astounding, and clearly shows an evidence of bias towards the issue from Mr. Jennings, his colleagues, and those in charge of their stations (Elder).

     When asked if they feel the news media is bias in their reporting, just about anyone will tell you that it is. Although they may disagree on which “side” the bias lies, that is irrelevant as we have established that all bias is a blotch on the record of trustworthiness for any news media outlet.

     Another trend in the news media industry is to have a panel of “experts” discuss the situations at hand. This idea that all news reports must come with a panel of “experts” contributes greatly to the bias present in news media. Instead of finding a group of people to give their personal opinion on the news of today, the media should be presenting just the facts of the story to the people – let them be their own “panel” with one another; it is highly probable that they will arrive at a much more informed and intelligent conclusion when they are encouraged to discuss the issues of the day with their peers instead of having other’s opinions placed into their head.

     Are the news stories reported by the American media unadulterated?

     They are sometimes, and sometimes not intentionally. In his book on bias at CBS, Bernard Goldberg recounts a story told to him by one of his colleagues, Larry Doyle.

     Doyle was sent to do a story about the reinstitution of “chain gangs” in Alabama. He and his partner arrived, and after getting some photos, interviews, video, and writing the story, Doyle put everything together and shipped it off to CBS where it aired on the CBS Evening News. The next day he received a call from a senior producer of the evening news, Al Berman. Berman called because Doyle had not “warned” the producers that all of the prisoners in the piece were black, except one. Berman went on to tell him, “Well, we have to be more careful next time, . . . We don’t want to give the impression that the only prisoners down there are black,” (97-100).

     This is not the only example of producers attempting to (and at times succeeding to) twist the news, and one can be sure the practice does not limit itself to CBS. One of the main reasons for this practice, one which many other reasons tie into, is the corporate ownership of the news media. The organization FAIR (Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting) writes this on the subject on its website:

     Almost all media that reach a large audience in the United States are owned by for-profit corporations--institutions that      by law are obligated to put the profits of their investors ahead of all other considerations. The goal of maximizing      profits is often in conflict with the practice of responsible journalism. (FAIR.org).

     The concept of maximizing profits conflicts with responsible journalism because there are considerations to take into account such as not offending the people to whom you are trying to sell your product, and entertaining them enough that they want to view your service again.

     I would propose a change in the way the news media is run. News media outlets should be non-profit entities, supported by those who use their service. These entities should also forgo advertising partners as a source of revenue because these partners and their values become superimposed upon the news being reported because the entities can not afford to lose their support. While there are non-profit news organizations, they still (for reasons mainly to do with bias and the fact that they do contain advertising) do not meet their obligations to society. Because a particular entity may be unable to support itself through its audience’s contributions, government grants should be instituted to assist those entities qualifying as news outlets. Obviously this qualification must be based on factors that have nothing to do with what the outlet reports as the government must not have control over what is being reported.

     Is the news provided by the American media pertinent?

This is one area our news media does decently; however, amidst the pertinent information lies useless stories about the goings on in the lives on various celebrities, and myriads of crime stories that merely serve to entertain rather than inform (Downie Jr., Kaiser 25). These types of stories (especially the ones related to entertainment) should be left for for-profit companies to sell to those interested in them.

     Although they do provide pertinent information, this information tends to be focused on local issues, and occasionally they may have a story on a national scale. Very rarely do our news organizations speak about the happenings in other countries on our own continent, let alone over seas. As our world becomes more globalized, it is important for citizens to be kept informed of important happenings all over the world, and the American news media must do a better job of this.

     Are the entities within the American news media functioning independently?

Nine large corporations (Time Warner, Disney, Bertelsmann, Viacom, News Corporation, Sony, TCI, Universal, and NBC) own many of the news outlets in America (McChesney). The smaller media outlets, those not owned by large corporations, often take their cue from these larger corporations. Too often these smaller outlets play the role of lapdog to large corporations and their agendas, instead of the role of a vigilant watchdog.

     The solution to this issue is much the same as the issue of the adulteration of the news. The outlet of news media should be removed from these corporate powers, and independent entities must take their place.

     Is the American news media truthful in its reporting?

     We can be thankful that, for the most part, the American news media does provide us with truthful news reports. This is, of course, in the sense that the facts being reported are correct, even though they may be twisted (and some omitted) to change the flow of a story. Obviously there will always be the unusual occurrence when, for one reason or another, an incorrect fact slips through the media’s fact checking; however, when this happens, most publications offer corrections and apologies for mistakes in the next release of their publication.

     Overall I believe we can fairly say that the American news media, as it currently stands, does not stand up to the measuring stick of social responsibility. This is sad because of the freeness it enjoys in our country. Unlike countries such as communist China or Cuba, where the press is government sanctioned and heavily censored, the American news media is unbelievably gifted in contrast. While a small amount of censorship still takes place from government agencies such as the FCC, much of the censoring in American news media is self imposed. A report by the Pew Research Center in conjunction with Columbia Journalism Review details this fact:

     Self-censorship is commonplace in the news media today, according to a survey of nearly 300 journalists and news executives by the Pew Research Center and the Columbia Journalism Review. About one-quarter of the local and national      journalists say they have purposely avoided newsworthy stories, while nearly as many acknowledge they have softened the      tone of stories to benefit the interests of their news organizations. Fully four-in-ten (41%) admit they have engaged in either or both of these practices.

     The poll of 206 reporters and 81 news executives -- 150 from local news outlets and 137 from national news organizations -- found widespread concern over commercial and competitive pressures. As a result of these pressures, say journalists, good stories all too frequently are not pursued.

     This act of self-censorship by journalists goes directly against the principles of their social responsibility. The fact that this censorship is done willfully and is not imposed upon them is an especially sad one. Obviously one can not expect the American news media (or any news media) to be perfect in all that they do. It should be expected that any group of organizations depending on human beings for their upkeep would have flaws present in them; however, it is important that these flaws are admitted and attempts are made to correct or remove them. It is here that the American news media fails its greatest. Their flaws are not only unacknowledged, they are nurtured.

     It is because of the freedom our news media enjoys and the flaws that are obviously present in it that we must demand proper reporting in line with standards of social responsibility. We can not allow such a great freedom – the freedom of the press – to become powerless, reporting only on the latest Hollywood scandal or sensationalized crime story. As citizens of a nation which allows for the freedom of the people to speak their mind, we must not allow the news to continue on its downward slope.

     This downward slope is our responsibility as well. The fact is, in American, news sells, and the people are buying. Most of these people are either ignorant or apathetic to the shortcomings of our news media, and they must be educated to understand otherwise. Until then, those of us who have looked at the news media under the microscope, to find its flaws and attempt to correct them, must be willing to send a message to the American news media that it is time for change. I believe there are two courses of action which, if employed, have the potential to bring about change.

     First, we should withhold support from organizations which do not practice socially responsible journalism. Because a majority of the outlets are run by major corporations, there is one thing they understand more than any other – money. Withholding support from these outlets is an important first step to bringing about change. When these corporations begin losing money, they will seek an answer, and it is then that they will listen to the complaints about their shortcomings and be willing to change. On the other side of this, we should attempt to support those journalists and outlets who do their best to live up to standards of social responsibility. They do exist, and increasing support will enhance their ability to bring proper news reporting to a larger audience.

     The second course of action has to do with that audience. We should be willing to take the time to educate others on the importance of a socially responsible news media in our society. The more people there are who are willing to make a stand against irresponsible journal, the larger the message to the ownership of these corporations will get.

     The news media in America has great freedom, and based on that freedom its failure is even greater. I believe that, through the dedication of people who are willing to take the time to study this subject and participate in working towards change, we can one day have a news media in America whose reporting is unbiased, unadulterated, pertinent, independent, and truthful, and when that news media is present, the citizens of American will be better off for it, having the ability to make more logical and thought out decisions.

Works Cited
Downie Jr., Leonard and Robert G. Kaiser. The News About the News: American Journalism in Peril.      New York: Random House, 2002.

Elder, Larry. “GOP’s Big Battle: Media.” 8 March 2001      http://www.cipherwar.com/news/01/media_bias.htm.

Elliott, Deni. “The Essential Role of News Media.” Phi Kappa Phi Forum. 84 (2004): 32-35.

Goldberg, Bernard. Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distorts the News. Washington, D.C.:      Regnery Publications, 2001.

FAIR.org. “What’s Wrong with the News?: Corporate Ownership.” Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting.      http://www.fair.org/media-woes/corporate.html.

McChesney, Robert W.. “The Global Media Giants: The Nine Firms That Dominate the World.” Extra!.      December 1997 http://www.fair.org/extra/9711/gmg.html.

Pew Research Center and Columbia Journalism Review. “Self Censorship: How Often and Why      Journalists Avoiding The News.” Pew Research Center for People and the Press. 30 April 2000      http://people-press.org/reports/print.php3?ReportID=39.

Smith, Tad. “Responsibility of during delivering the truth: Business leadership of a news      organization.” Vital Speeches of the Day. 69 (2003): 571.