The Truth, The Whole Truth & Nothing But...

In the eyes of the public, journalists sit on the same rung of the honesty ladder as used-car salesmen.

The old line "Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story" has been fully and purposefully harnessed by some individuals and their publications (ie: NW, Who Weekly and the like).

I think a strong majority of journalists hold 'truth' and public duty as paramount to their position but often, the pressures placed on the modern journalist contribute to slipping standards.

As Sharon Tickle points out in her Tapsall & Varley chapter, (and as has been discussed in previous Theory of Journalism... blogs) the everyday reality of a journalist is "shaped by time pressures, market forces, law, work culture and practices, human frailty, and the journalist's experiences".

On the side of the public, Tickle expresses concern for the consumer in the technological age.

She asks: "In this digital age of textual and visual manipulation, can
the consumer ever be certain they are seeing the 'real thing'?"

In answer to Tickle's chapter, Nick, Dom & Ben presented a range of responses in their seminar presentations.

Nick retraced Tickle's path through the history of 'truth' from the theories of Plato and Aristotle to those of Foucault.

Nick and Ben both found a contradiction in the ability of one to be both an ideal journalist, and a post-modernistic think.

Ideally a journalist will be guided by the MEAA's Code of Ethics: to have "respect for truth and the public's right to information".

From Nick's presentation however, post-modernists pupport that a text has as many truths as it does readings.

Ben found these two identities to be mutually exclusive: to believe in one way would be contradictory of the other.

I agree.

It is dangerous territory to say that one is a journalist, reporting 'truthful' information to the public, when one does not at all expect the audience to interpret a report with the same purpose that it was written.

I think a middle-ground here could come from Journalist's awareness of the possibility that their reportage may be interpretted differently by individuals in different contexts.

To maintain honesty in reporting, effort should be put into minimising ambiguity.

Nick used footage of the Iraq war as an example of truthful reporting.

This was a great demonstration of how digital manipulation is playing an increasing role in modern news media.

Both film clips aimed to show the "real story" for US soldiers.

One clip was from an American TV show that gives troops video cameras to make video diaries of their experiences.

The show's producers then edit the footage down to fit in to a regular TV program.

The second clip was a rough clip of a shootout involving US soldiers from the top of an Iraqi building.

It was filmed by a soldier with a hand held camera and posted on Youtube.

Nick posed the question - what is the more 'truthful' representation of the war?

I think the lack of intervention involved in the production of the second clip results in something more representative of the truth.

It's sad to say, but media companies have such strong ties with such powerful people that it is hard to find 'real truth' that isn't tarnished by someone else's aims.

Finding "The Truth, The Whole Truth & Nothing But..." seems to be as tough as finding the definitive answer to the question what is a journalist.