There is a time and a place for opinion, but not in the news.

Like many things, journalism has changed drastically within the past few years.  Clearly, technology has improved, improving the quality of reports; however, other things have changed as well.   

With the positive developments of journalism, people have also developed a comfort.; some people have become a little too comfortable.  

In most recent years, newscasters have began to not just relay information, but have begun to take this information into their own hands, and voice their opinions.  This has become a major issue.  One can listen, read or watch two different people talk about the same information and get something totally different out of each one depending on how the author or speaker project it.   In other words, when people begin to use their input to develop a story, the whole tone of the news can change.  For example, some news channels are known to side with specific parties (MSNBC tends to lead more Democratic, while Fox tends to lean more Republican).  Another example that comes up a lot is the discussion of the Middle East.  Many times, people complain that newscasters are anti-Israel and are not sharing the full story.  Of course, at other times, opposing people think that Israel is being favored too much. 

Voicing one’s opinion is not wrong, however, there is a time and a place for it.  

The New York Time Opinion Page

Opinion and fact should be distinctly separated.  Straight-forward, factual information should be given in news reports.  Blog and opinion columns would be the place for personality and character; this is what blogs and opinion columns were created for.  Moreover, with today’s technology, most articles even have an area where viewers can comment; opinion can be show in this manner as well.  Opinions are far from being unimportant; everyone should absolutely be able to voice themselves.  Everyone should take advantage of his or her first amendment.  However, as mentioned, this just needs to be separated from information that is just purely fact.  It would be against one’s character ethics to share information to the world that is weighted towards that individual’s opinions.  This is especially true in cases where it is unknown whether information is fact or personal thoughts.  On the other hand, if delivering information in this way was that easy, it would not be an issue.  Often times it is hard to say just facts without any opinion.  People constantly select what they think are “important facts” subconsciously in their minds.  However, these may be things that are important to that one individual.  Another person may find alternative more important than things the other individual selected.  Newscasters do not always intend for their personal thoughts to be incorporated, but the things that they naturally focus on makes this occur.  This leads to the question, should the input of personal thought be the responsibility of the individual or of the news group?

The media that hires an individual is responsible for that individual’s reports.

Of course, the company cannot control everything that he/she says.  However, there are various technological tools that can edit and reform what people say within milliseconds of it being broadcasted.  Moreover, media companies know who they are hiring.  As mentioned earlier, some media companies lean towards specific parties; these media companies most likely only hire people with their same views.  Because of this, the companies are trusting the people that they hire to continue on with the mind-set held by the company; the company is responsible for hiring this person.  Moreover, the company that hires the journalists assigns them to specific stories.  If a company were concerned about what a journalist was saying, they could set specific guidelines for what that reporter could or could not say.  Otherwise, if this does not occur, the company cannot tell the journalists that they are doing something wrong.  Again, the company holds more ethical responsibilities than the individual journalists.

Although it is hard to withdraw oneself from a situation, and simply state facts and not opinion, journalists should not be blocked from things that question their impartiality.  If they are always taken away from situations where their opinions could matter, how will they ever learn to avoid their opinion and just state facts?  Like everyone else, journalists must learn.  Journalists must try to find a way to separate fact from what they think are facts. 

Though journalism will most likely never return to an unbiased state, hopefully more journalists will be inclined to use blogging for their opinions rather than news reports.  With more technology coming out, and more ways for people to voice their thoughts, bias and breaks in ethics and journalism will hopefully decrease.