<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: An important new resource for journalist and consumers of ne
Review: 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!
Rating: 
Summary: Something is Missing
Review: Although this book always recurs to the purpose of journalism: i.e. to inform the public, it always does it narrowly, in the light of the need for an informed public to support the democratic form of government. I couldn't agree more that the recent course of history suggests that mankind is tending toward recognition of the fact that the only legitimate form of government is based on the consent of the governed.But there is a higher object of information: Survival of the Race. It is obvious that if we survive by adaptation (natural selection resulting in survival of the fittest) that accurate information is indispensable. It was my feeling for many years that communism in the USSR was doomed since every child, biologically programmed to use information to survive, was born an enemy of the state. Furthermore, the USSR always thought it was perfect, so why evolve when we are already perfect? One can see where that took them. In view of this I sense that our two authors of this book would greatly profit by reading and heeding THE LUCIFER PRINCIPLE and GLOBAL BRAIN, both by Howard Bloom before revising their book if they ever do. Both books make the real challenge obvious. Survival of the race. I applaud the recognition of the authors of the fact that persons of less than desirable integrity give the press its current bad name. I've encountered enough of them myself, having had moles sicced on me by what amount to impostors, both so-called journalists, but in view of the fact that the result was my photo occupying the entire front page of a wide circulation "rag" in full color, I had no objections. As John Barrymore said to the Press, "Just spell my name right, boys." I write books. Name identification sells them and it hardly matters what we are identified for. I highly recommend this book to anyone with an ounce of public spirit. It is long overdue for the pracitioners of the trade to start policing their business better. After occupying the moral high ground with this pair of authors, however, for the jaded reader who is exhausted with the prospect of the monumental task, I recommend the work of another journalist: Ben Hecht. His CHILD OF THE CENTURY may not recount the highest form of journalistic integrity, just the opposite occasionally, but who can help but roar over a headline of his spicy journal covering the rape of a patient by a dentist?: "DENTIST FILLS WRONG CAVITY!" Go it, boys!
Rating:
Summary: Clear explanation of the purpose of journalism
Review: 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!
Rating:
Summary: Clear explanation of the purpose of journalism
Review: 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!
Rating:
Summary: Clear explanation of the purpose of journalism
Review: 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!
Rating:
Summary: absolutely loved it
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: Journalism's New Manifesto - Hold all Newspeople to it!
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: At last, a journalism Bible that's both clear and readable
Review: 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!
Rating:
Summary: A must read for anyone in the media
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: Thoughtful and thought-provoking
Review: 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.
<< 1 >>
| 
