Customer Reviews

The Elements of Journalism: What Newspeople Should Know and the Public Should Expect

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Did you ever give much thought to the "unbiased" nature of journalism? Or about "balanced coverage" in articles and newscasts? Well, Kovach and Rosenstiel certainly have -- and their thoughts on these concepts are nothing short of revolutionary.

1. The authors argue that by nature, journalists are biased -- and that this is ok.

2. They also claim that "balanced coverage" is unfair, and should not be a goal of journalism.

Sounds crazy, right? At first blush, yes; but by clearly delineating what journalists SHOULD do, the authors make a strong argument that "bias" and "balance" are misused terms that ought to be discarded.

For example, they say that requiring journalists to be unbiased is unnatural, for bias is part of human nature -- and professional journalists should not be required to forget who they are. Instead, journalists should maintain an *independence* from those they cover, so that they are not unduly influenced by people they interview -- even if they do agree with them.

Likewise, they argue that "balance" should not be a tenet of journalism, because not all voices deserve equal time. The authors instead suggest keeping the news "comprehensive and proportional," so that the time allotted to various parties in an issue is proportional to their role or importance in that issue.

And so, perhaps Kovach and Rosenstiel aren't so crazy, after all. In fact, the book is full of sensible arguments like these, making it a fascinating read; what I've discussed here is only the tip of the iceberg.

I highly recommend it!

If you are a reporter, an editor, a source, a media-critic or just want to be more informed about the people informing you -- buy this slim little treasure trove of clear, well-written prose.

It is remarkable for its honest portrait of American journalism circa the New Millenium. It is designed to be a primer for citizens, journalists and journalism students in the issues surrounding:

1)Ethics
2)Commercial Pressures
3)Techniques
4)The Future

And unlike most media-critic books, this one doesn't have a political chip on its shoulder. Nor does it take an arrogant tone, despite it's axiomatic nature (to paraphrase Carl Sessions Stepp).

It's actually a pretty humble assesment by two people who care a lot about journalism.

The authors clearly had "The Elements of Style" in mind when they wrote this book, and "The Elements of Journalism" has what it takes to become that same sort of indispensable classic. Everyone who aspires to become a journalist, who makes a living as a journalist, or who consumes journalism and wants to sharpen his or her critical skills should read this book. Moreover, "The Elements of Journalism" seems to be sparking a renewed national debate on the vital role of journalism in a free society and the professional standards that are required to effectively play that role. In an age of nonjournalistic corporations gobbling up journalistic media and spitting it out as "infotainment," the articulation of these standards is more important than ever. Bravo!

I read this book as a first year grad student studying journalism. It's an interesting read - probably the only book I read that whole semester that I actually liked. It leaves the reader with a sense of purpose and commitment to the craft of journalism.

Then I went out and start reporting in the real world. I immediately realized "Elements of Journalism" is hopelessly idealistic. The book has a great vision for where the profession should be, but no suggestions on how to get there.

For my journalism class, I had to choose a book of merit about the media. "The Elements of Journalism" doesn't disappoint. This book takes the form of an instructional guide in that its objective does tell what journalists should be doing in order to create an effective press and what the public should expect from it. I find "The Elements of Journalism" to be of great use since it outlines what every budding journalist should follow to maintain ethics, objectivity, and truth in their work. It even describes man's history with the need for communication and a briefing of journalism's role in history. The book is written with clarity and the topics flow together. I also noticed that Kovach and Rosentiel developed many "theories" of the media-which all seem true too.

What will always stay with me is the "The Theory of the Interlocking Public"-that states that everyone has an interest and is an expert in something. We need to be knowledgeable about the realistic description of how people interact with the news in order to present information as accurately as possible so that an individual group is not drawn to an article but a WHOLE variety of people depending on their level of knowledge about the world. Good journalism targets each level. I always remember this while writing an article for the paper.

As for what citizens should expect from the press, I admired the quote "The marketplace fails if we as citizens are passive, willing to put up with a diminishing product because we have no alternative. It works only if we act with a voice and a reason." It basically means that the purpose of a press (to convey the information that people need to be sovereign) will deteriorate if the people don't take action and speak up in what they believe in and hold true.

And, I can go on and on....because this book is so full of insightful information. I recommend it for anybody interested in the workings of the media.

After researching the problems in modern journalism, Kovach and Rosenstiel got the input of journalists and others around the country on the crucial question of how to rediscover and rearticulate the essence of journalists' craft and the role of journalists in society. That is the inspiration and the subject of the book. But this is much more than a rulebook for journalists -- it also explores the critical relationship between those who cover the news and those of us who are consumers of the news. It is serious stuff. It is also exceptionally well-written, fascinating and important. For anyone concerned about the way the news is made and interested in a thoughtful critique and useful suggestions, this is the book for you. Buy it!

The newspaper I work for has been going through some major renovations to reclaim readers, offering them a product that they want - that they can't live without. This book gives another side of the same story, focusing on the principles that journalists must keep in order to survive on into the 21st century with their integrity intact. I am a sub-editor and will be strongly recommending this book to all of our senior staff, including those in non-writing departments.

The project of Kovach and Rosenstiel (indeed, the project of the entire Committee of Concerned Journalists) was to distill and publish the basic building blocks of what we understand as journalism. In this, they do an admirable job. Stressing qualities such as fairness to the facts and activities such as verification, they make a strong case that while the journalist may not be impartial his/her method should be.

Useful for both public and professionals, the book is well-structured with notes at the end of each chapter with pointers to further reading.

This book is probably a good overview for someone new to these issues. However, for someone like me who has been interested in these issues for years, there is little here that you wouldn't have already seen in the newspaper coverage of this topic. I had hope of finding some pithy characterizations of the issues, but this book contained none that I hadn't already seen. However, for the newbie, this book does a good job at collecting and presenting them (and citing sources). And it is very readable.

My biggest disappointment was that the authors chose to exclude the issues of fairness and balance - as a person involved in events covered by the press, this is my biggest source of frustration with journalists. The most common problem is with the structure of an article: One side's position and arguments are given, and repeated, in the beginning and middle of the article, with other points of view not appearing until near the very end. When I try to talk to the journalist about the well-known problems with this structure, my comments are routinely dismissed with "But its all in there."

Note: By "fairness" and "balance" I mean what is understood by normal people and not the bizarre, discredited definitions used by journalists. Rather than try to rehabilitate these terms (a difficult task), the authors attempt, unsuccessfully, to introduce replacements (for example, "proportionality" which is presented by an unsatisfying metaphor).

My second disappointment was that the portion of the title "and the Public Should Expect" is an empty promise: The book is entirely focused on the journalist's perspective.

I did find it interesting the number of times that the authors commented that journalists were *not* trained in key aspects of their job but had to figure it out for themselves. This confirmed intuitions developed from my experience with journalists.

It was a requirement for my Journalism class, but I thoroughly enjoyed the read. Kovach does a wonderful job in using easy to understand rules and examples so anyone can understand what Journalism is truly about.