In the early 1800’s, the term, “The Fourth Estate”, was coined in reference to a free and unfettered press. The first three “Estates” are the legislative, judicial, and executive branches of the government. The Fourth Estate was seen as the last of the four cornerstones that uphold a free and democratic society. The recognition of the vital need to have and guarantee a free press was written into the Constitution by our country’s Founders.
Axiomatic to the exercise of a free press must be the reciprocal element of responsibility to the people. The public’s right to know is to be carried out by that free press. This principle has stood the test of time from the beginning of our Republic until the present day; but not without periods of failure.
In New York City over 100 years ago, the term “Yellow Journalism” came into being as a result of the battle between the New York Journal and the New York World for increased circulation. Critics attacked both newspapers for building circulation based upon sex, violence and crime sprinkled with emotionalism, inaccuracies, and exaggerations.
We seem to be in a period of resurgence of yellow journalism. Today’s yellow journalism finds fertile ground in would-be or pseudo journalists whose motives have little to do with social conscience, disclosure of injustice, uncovering wrong doing or giving voice to the voiceless. Rather these journalists-in-name only are self-seekers whose motives involve pride, profit, power and a practice of abusing the standards of journalism. Today’s journalists, particularly those of the electronic media, are becoming entertainers, celebrities and spokespersons for the rich and powerful. In short, they have failed the people.
The firewall that used to exist between news and editorials has either faded or completely broken down. Whatever the medium, what distinguishes the best from the rest is the quality of objectivity and completeness in covering news combined with a clear, sharp line between news and opinion. In television, the distinction has disappeared completely. Advocacy reporting has become the norm. Ratings have become supreme.
The print media, newspapers and magazines, have not faired much better. The consolidation of ownership from many thousands of independently owned publications to fewer and fewer media groups or giants has made the profit motive supreme; not the telling of thoughtful, deep, complete, and accurate stories upon which the public depends.
Too many contemporary journalists, in a rush to be first in print or on air that has to do more with personal prestige than with informing the public, have overlooked two basic journalistic rules: 1) find a second, confirming source, and 2) check, check, and then recheck…. Then give the whole story as objectively as humanly possible to the public. The media owes the public an abiding sense of fairness and responsibility. A free press is only as good, and as durable, as its performance.
We are now in the early years of a new era: that of the Internet dissemination of news. Traditional media have an increasing presence there, but the real ground swell is from thousands who have chosen to communicate with their fellows what their own eyes have seen and ears have heard. They have as well chosen to express their own opinions about what they have seen and heard. We have another chance now to try to get it right. A free society feeds on an informed citizenry, not on talking or blogging heads broadcasting an undifferentiated mix of news and opinion.
Real, professional journalism is the effort to help the reader know the difference between fact and fiction. This requires a pledge to follow established practices of good journalism. This requires a pledge to state as clearly as possible what is believed to be verified fact verses a writer’s opinion or information that cannot be independently confirmed
We know the notion that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty; and surely that will continue to be true where information freedom is concerned. The formal press and now the one person who transmits information to others must stand responsible — which is to say professional, conscientious, discreet, fair, and accurate. The health of our nation depends upon an accurately informed public. The right of the people to know must be a sacred pledge.
(The above largely from USFEVA.ORG; an organization no longer existing.)