Why Independence is important in journalism

The picture above shows examples of the dangerous practice of commercializing journalism; I will delve more into my point of this picture later, so stay tuned!

When the group began their presentation, I wasn't really sure what to expect. What did they mean: independence in journalism? Independence from who? Well, here's the answer I gathered from the reading and from class: journalists have to maintain independence from pretty much everyone and anything but the truth. If they keep close personal ties with sources, story subjects, and even, in several cases, the government, their "news" can become unidentified advertising. Now this media advocacy has its value, and is good when used correctly. But the public has a right to know the difference between the facts presented through journalism and biased, media sales.

I found an interesting example of advocacy journalism in an article in the Columbia Journalism Review, and it was blatant advertising that was broadcast on a news morning show. It took a woman who was fired from her job for laughing, covered that newsworthy soft news event, while displaying her website information for her new pottery business that she was starting. They also announced how people could most easily do business with this person. It was a supreme example of taking a newsworthy event, and blowing it into some specialized advertisement. This is the kind of "news" that is hindering the news media credibility and thus, losing viewers.

My favorite principle mentioned in the presentation was taken directly from the SPJ Code of Ethics: "Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable." To me, this instructs journalists to never be afraid to do the right thing. I heard this and got all excited about the potential satisfaction that I can get by doing my duty as a journalist. But Professor Nelson said something that kind of busted my bubble. He said that the major media corporations live in fear of lawsuits, and while sometimes they stand up straight and courageously do the right thing, they usually are too scared to do so when faced with the disapproval of a powerful authority.

My spirits were further dampened when we started reading the examples on the group's hand-out of "Government Sponsored News." The Karen Ryan example really struck me, and what was even more disturbing was her excuse for taking government payment for a story: "I just did what everybody else in the industry was doing." Under the guise of a journalist, she essentially worked for the government. What happened to the first amendment? Isn't it still important to maintain journalistic independence from the government? I believe it is; this is one of the key components of maintaining democratic freedom.

Thus, going back to my headline picture, journalism should not be sold to the public, and commercialized. Journalists can't accept payment bonuses to cover stories because this disrupts the credibility of the news. The news media is not an advertising organization. We are journalists! And the public expects us to be independent from our sources so we can deliver the facts as straight and as unbiased as possible.