In your opinion what is the difference between journalism and activism?

Um... the first one doesn't exist anymore?

People are always biased to some degree, it's human nature. But they don't even try anymore, their righteousness has gotten in the way.

Just think of democrat activists as journalists and it all makes sense.

Journalism = Objective

There hasn't been Journalism in 30 years. I remember watching Walter Chronkite and not really knowing which direction he leaned because he actually presented the news in a non-inflammatory objective manner....for the most part. Today most reporting is done based on crafting the message the network wants to convey and not the objective facts.

quote:

Originally posted by stickman428:
In your opinion what is the difference between journalism and activism?

Facts vs. feelings.

Biased opinion masquerading as "context" has been the death of traditional journalism.

Objectivity and thoroughness - because one without the other still makes it possible to distort the reality being communicated.

1 - Journalism = Reporting the news as it occurred without embellishment regardless which group(s) that reporting helps or hurts.

2 - Activism = Altering the news (i.e. lying) in support of an agenda or group.

1 no longer exists, while 2 is rampant.

As a former journalist, I can honestly say that the fleeting sights of professional journalism over the last decades are rare.

quote:

Originally posted by cruiser68:
Journalism = Objective

There hasn't been Journalism in 30 years. I remember watching Walter Chronkite and not really knowing which direction he leaned because he actually presented the news in a non-inflammatory objective manner....for the most part. Today most reporting is done based on crafting the message the network wants to convey and not the objective facts.

Journalists are objective
Activists have an objective

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
1 - Journalism = Reporting the news as it occurred without embellishment regardless which group(s) that reporting helps or hurts.

2 - Activism = Altering the news (i.e. lying) in support of an agenda or group.

1 no longer exists, while 2 is rampant.

Yep. Used to be 1 and you formed your own opinion.

Now most are 2 and want to brainwash you with their bullshit.

I won’t argue with most of the points made, but activism by the news media is hardly new.

Things may have died down a little in the middle of the twentieth century, but I first noticed a major swing back to journalistic activism when the left decided that Barry Goldwater shouldn’t be elected President. And then there was the example of “the most trusted man in America,” Walter Cronkite, and his reporting on the war in Vietnam. Fair and balanced? Um …, no.

Going back further, “yellow journalism” is a term that’s still sometimes heard, and it wasn’t because William Randolph Hearst reported the news during the Spanish American War in an impartial, responsible manner. The local paper in my small town that was founded in 1879 still includes “Democrat” in its name, and that was common during the era. There were many papers that included either Democrat or Republican in their names, and they weren’t referring to the American system of government.

The fact that it’s been common throughout our history doesn’t excuse the lack of fair and reasonable reporting, but we owe it to ourselves to understand its history.

Currently, none.

quote:

Originally posted by vthoky:

quote:

Originally posted by stickman428:
In your opinion what is the difference between journalism and activism?

Facts vs. feelings.

The problem with this is the selective reporting of selected facts, and the suppression of other, more inconvenient facts.

In too many cases the same thing. A means to an end with a subjectively defined greater good as the guide. As such unfairness and collateral damage are a given. One of those reds said it well, you have to break some eggs to make an omelet.

I got a Broadcast Journalism degree from SMU back in 1977.

When people over the years have asked me why I didn’t go into that field, I tell them, “Because I found out I’d have to sell my soul to do it.”

Journalism is presenting the facts and letting the reader/viewer determine the truth.

Activism is presenting only the information that justifies the narrative they want the reader/viewer to believe.

Is an activist with a platform and audience just another propagandist? What is the difference? Are the two terms synonymous?

Yellow Journalism in its current form goes back to the 1890's. It's used to shape public opinion. Hence its activism is 100+ years old.

Hell, the Washington Post was originally created to be the mouthpiece of the Democratic Party. Any journalism the've done is purely accidental / or focus on the opposition party. Eh, Watergate, anyone?

I recall reading that in WW I and WW II, Britain's number 1 critical task was to get American public option on its side, in order to get American Industry, Treasure and Bodies in to the fight on it side. Let's just say, 'the Germans were treated like Trump, especially in the WW I'. Newspaper activism was crucial.

PBS recently had a piece on Joseph Pulitzer, who coined the term 'Fake News', before 'The Donald', or more properly today; President Donald J. Trump, cleaner of the Swamp, did.

In fact Pulitzer was so disgusted in what 'journalism' had become, covering for the Swamp, and shipping public option instead of 'reporting' on the news, not publishing the journalists option of the news, that he created the Pulitzer Prize to reward real journalism.

Pulitzer must be spinning in his grave today.

Of course if there were real journalism, Pulitzer might have a lot more company - the swamp likes mist/fog so that its creatures laugh all the way to the bank. It's easy to construct accidental deaths today. Just hack the car - the resources available to the swamp can just about do anything.

quote:

Originally posted by adobesig:
As a former journalist, I can honestly say that the fleeting sights of professional journalism over the last decades are rare.

This ^^^^^

The woman I dated before I hooked up with the one that was to become my wife had a degree in journalism. Graduated cum laude, too. By the time I met her she'd been out of journalism for several years, having left in utter despair and disgust with what was becoming of her vocation. She once allowed as how she was sometimes embarrassed to even mention her degree. That's pretty sad

One of the last times we talked she'd recently been invited to lunch with some ex-colleagues who had been in town for some or another "journalism" event. She reported to me it was an astonishing experience. She related that these people were living in their own little "unreality bubble," which bore no relationship whatsoever to what was really going on in the world. This was nigh on 30+ years ago, mind you.