Introduction.
Many of us have been and are often critical of modern journalistic reporting of events and issues of our day. Reporting that fails even the most rudimentary of sniff tests for authenticity and truth. Having been raised on the likes of Edward R. Murrow, Eric Sevareid, Walter Cronkite, et al, I have found the modern day mainstream media (MSM) wanting and at times even sophomoric in their reporting.
Yet I cannot in good conscience continue to assail their work without at least re-establishing my own understanding of what it is I perceive they should be doing. As stated, I have the memory of their progenitors and the caliber of their reporting. Flawed memory perhaps, but I rather doubt it. I also have the alt-media with which to contrast their work. The alt-media does pass rudimentary sniff tests for truth and factual accuracy although it seldom passes the impartiality test which in my mind further elevates the work of the Murrows of the past.
I challenged myself over this last MSM-critical posting in essence saying to myself, "by what standard, by what recognized basis do I level these criticisms?" After all, these are folks trying to earn a living like anyone else. In my library was a copy of "Writing & Reporting News" by Carole Rich. A book I bought many years ago when I began doing stringer work for local papers. I read enough to get by but paid little attention to its many finer aspects, especially journalistic ethics. It may not be the best reference for a standard but it is one I did not compose. And it is a reference used in the college-level courses on journalism.
As I read it for the first time from cover to cover, I will post impressions, thoughts, and principles the work espouses on the profession of journalism so that my future postings will be grounded on a more technical level. I invite you to follow these articles as I go on this journey and welcome your comments... Just in case I miss something important.
