THE IDEA OF ADVOCACY journalism has been around as long as niche publications, with the main concept being that the media outlet should act in the best interests of the community it serves.
The danger is that you are allowing the media - which has a vast audience and massive influence - to decide what the values of the community are.
But everyone can agree that adults should not be preying upon children online, right? And now an Albany, NY local newscast is championing laws against online predators.
Metroland writes that WRGB "reporters get behind specific issues of the day, agitate for change, and act as the mouthpiece for their viewers." When education reporter Michelle Smith (pictured above) reported in September that there are no laws in New York state to make it a crime for an adult to use the Internet to attempt to arrange a meeting with a child, hundreds of parents responded, and Smith had found her cause.
“They started asking for my help,” Smith told Metroland. “They wanted to know what they could do.”
Should the reporters advocate for change? Isn't it their responsibility to make the community better, safer? If government is dropping the ball, isn't it the role of the journalist to stump for action?
Or is this just a blatant ratings grab, a massive suck up to the community on an issue that is such a no-brainer it's almost insulting?
BY THE WAY, welcome back from your mini-break. Here are a few other interesting items worth mentioning:
Inquirer columnist Tom Ferrick makes fun of Ann Weaver Hart and John Street: How he chose Temple.
And a Time magazine editor-at-large blames a great book for creating the cult of personality presidential election process.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment