Monday, October 26, 2009
Mightier Than the Sword
What, in reading about the history of American journalism, surprised you the most? A particular incident? A particular personage? A particular development or trend? Briefly explain why (but in more than one hurried sentence). Please post your response by 4 p.m. Sunday, Nov. 1.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
I guess what surprised me the most about Mightier than the Sword was the comprehensive history it gave since day one of journalism. I was torn in what to respond on because I found two of the chapters quite compelling. I really liked the chapter “Creating ‘Rosie the Riveter” because it focused on women going into the workforce, and the support that they got from the media for doing so, but I found the beginning of journalism the most interesting because in history classes throughout our years of education, our teachers never told us really how the colonists began revolting against the idea of British rule.
I found that between Paine and Adams they were responsible for influencing public opinion in the colonies. That they united the colonies during a time of upheaval. It is interesting how media today still unifies a country, as seen during the 9/11 attacks, when newspapers and other outlets captured Americans’ fear or uncertainties and created an umbrella of patriotism where the masses stood under for protection. Paine and Adams did the same exact thing over two hundred years prior. I had no idea that they had given the people the fuel actually continue on with the revolution.
I really admire what Paine especially did. He came to the colonies which such passion and ironically, common sense. He had so many valuable thoughts and ideas which separated him from others and allowed him to publish 150,000 copies of Common Sense. He motivated people to fight for what they believed in and didn’t care if he was seen as controversial. This was a crucial time in American history, and it is a shame that this isn’t a focus in education. I think we forget especially in today’s society that words are so powerful. Paine and the other journalists in the book shaped history in so many ways, they created a rubric of how as writers and journalists we should act, and I think that the media today should take a look at the past and try to fill their rather large shoes.
The news today has left me very disappointed in my choice in major. I come to class everyday hoping to be the one person to make a difference that changes the direction my profession is heading.
When I first started reading Mightier than the Sword I was looking for that kind of story. The story that would inspire me to be that change. I found that in the story of Elijah Lovejoy. The fight behind his words were mostly for the emancipation of all enslaved people, but what I think caught my attention most was his defending of the press. He went against what the majority of the people surrounding him followed and when told to stop, he fought stronger for his first amendment right.
This moment in journalism stuck out most to me because I feel that majority of journalists today are playing it safe when it comes to reporting the truth. Unlike Lovejoy, they report on stories that have little or no significance in my life. Rather than being informed on health care or the war, I'm learning about what new Twilight star got their haircut or Micheal Jackson's family after his death.
Lovejoy's tragic fall after fighting for something that he believed in made me feel hopeful for the first time since choosing my major. He made me realize that our responsibilities as journalists is more than just reporting the truth, but rather fighting for what's right with only a printing press and the freedom to speak.
It's going to look like I didn't read, but, I really want to discuss the first chapter of Mightier Than the Sword, Sowing the Seeds of Revolution. I mentioned the chapter in class this week and it really struck me as interesting due to how partisan journalism's beginning was. It reminded me of a class I took last semester, journalism and integrity, which was basically a weekly 3-hour discussion of how we as journalists have a duty to tell the truth and remain objective. While Adams and Paine were working for the advancement and freedom of their people through their writing, Streitmatter points out that much of what they wrote was exaggerated or even fabricated. I was confused because I've always been taught to never skew a story in a particular direction for the benefit of my audience or myself. But, their journalism was partisan for a purpose, because it moved people to a rebellion that freed them from oppression. I guess I'm not making much sense because I still can't grasp how wildly different journalism's beginning is from its current state. I've always had truth and objectivity drummed into my brain, and it turns out, that's not how journalism began at all.
Not all journalism is objective even today. Look at editorial pages. Look at Fox News. Look at opinion magazines. Look at books of creative nonfiction. Objective journalism is just one strand in the fabric of journalism. That's a useful thing to recognize and remember.
I was really shocked to learn about the violence against the editors of abolitionist papers. The aspect of it that surprised me was that it happened in America. I hate to come off like some overprotected ignorant American, but I've always thought that this was one country where journalism is safe to practice since there's very little risk of being arrested for what you write. I think that Lovejoy's case in particular is the most surprising, since he was a minister and advocating for an issue that seems like it should be common sense.
Then you'll be surprised to know that publishers have been prosecuted for obscenity for publishing Joyce's ULYSSES and writers and editors have been prosecuted for sedition for criticizing the federal government or even for holding unpopular minority opinions.
One of the most surprising things in Mightier Than the Sword is how much the press and the people running it have changed since its beginning. The press caused, in part, the American Revolution as well as the abolition of slavery. The first was essentially done through the spreading of lies, something I never associated with the early press.
I always viewed the original newspapers as being fact based and reliable, better than the news we read today. But, in fact, many of the stories in Sam Adam's Journal of Occurrences which contributed to the American Revolution were false and intended only to provoke the public. If these lies had never been created would we still be under British rule? It's certainly interesting to think about.
I also thought it was interesting how persistent members of the early press were. In his fight against slavery, Elijah Lovejoy had three presses destroyed and still bought a fourth before being murdered outside the building he housed it in. William Lloyd Garrison, fighting for the same cause, was almost thrown out a window with a rope around his neck before being rescued. Streitmatter writes; "Such acts of intimidation didn't cause Garrison to reduce his radicalism, but to escalate it." (33) I can't think of many people in today's press who would have that kind of persistence in fighting for a cause.
What I meant to say but didn't, is in our classes, why is objective journalism stressed so much when, like you said, it's not all that's out there?
I was very surprised when I read the chapter "Slowing the Momentum for Women's Rights." I was shocked to learn that the press had such a large role in stifling the women's role in society, especially after reading that it had such a prominent role in the abolition of slavery. There were plenty of writers who were publishing pamphlets to inform the public about the evils of slavery, but in the case of women's rights they were publishing cartoons making fun of the women at the forefront of the movement. A cartoon was published depicting Susan B. Anthony as a frail ugly woman and Elizabeth Cady Stanton as an overly obese woman to belittle their efforts. It was inevitable for readers to see this image and laugh at these strong women and their efforts.
I was most also shocked to learn about this because the press was also stifling their own growth. Opening up the civil rights of women could have welcomed more women to the journalism field and added a new perspective to the media. Instead they prevented women from joining in with the rest of the boys and slowed their progress.
anyone who wants to know more about the struggle of women for equality in journalism is invited to read the chapter on "stunt girls & sob sisters" in my book THE JOURNALIST AS AUTOBIOGRAPHER or another book of mine, GIRL REPORTER. . . The media have always defined and reinforced conventional social roles, including gender roles. it goes on today.
This quote from Hearst was the most surprising and impressive thing that I read so far in Mightier Than the Sword:
“The newspaper is the greatest force in civilization.
Under republican government, newspapers form and express public opinion.
They suggest and control legislation.
They declare wars…
The newspapers control the nation.”
This statement is shocking in its display of Hearst’s ego. It also is the most educational line I’ve read in my studies of the media so far. This was his public opinion, not some sneaky thing that he discussed in his private life. He actually wanted people to know that he had the ability to cause wars, and cause anything else he wanted, as long as it would increase circulation. The fact that he got elected to congress is also a bit shocking to me. With only the most rudimentary of media outlets, he was able to craft the public opinion however he wanted to, and still have enough credit in the public to join the government. Hell, he is why we have Guam and Puerto Rico.
Ted Turner and Rupert Murdoch would probably run for office too, except they don’t need to, because TV is so much more effective than newspapers. That’s the other shocking thing about this quote. Hearst was able to cause a war while it was obvious to many people that his papers are yellow. Today, these same sensational yellow stories are being broadcast much more efficiently, and the people broadcasting have gotten much better at confusing the false with the fact. They have gotten much better at shaping the public opinion, and much better at controlling countries. Silvio Berlusconi, the prime minister of Italy, is a good example of a media baron who has conquered an entire country. Berlusconi’s only mistake was that he let everyone know that he was in charge. Imagine if nobody knew.
So, the surprising thing about this quote is that Hearst actually said it, and it applies to us today, because Rupert Murdoch is being quite silent, and much more effective.
I loved "Mightier Than the Sword". I was going to be a History Major and find the American Revolution particularly interesting. I love the fact that Journalism created history, as well as documented it. I see it as a multi-faceted dimension; The introduction of the book expresses this using the word "shape". The news media works an issue into public consciousness, where real change can occur, and history is made.
I wasn't really surprised by anything in particular, partly because I have already read about most of the cases and history covered. I always love reading about Sam Adam's writings and Paine's "Common Sense".
I was surprised to read that The Washington Post was the only paper to really cover the Watergate scandal, and other papers even criticized The Post for overplaying it. It goes to show how government has the power to downplay and hide information that would be detrimental to whomever is in power. Such is happening right now with the Single-Payer Healthcare movement. It is a huge grassroots movement that many people support, but the Insurance companies and government have done a great job of keeping it out of the media.
press lords like hearst & pulitzer were the journalistic equivalent of the robber barons in other industries of the era. . . just as the media conglomerates of today are the equivalent of corporations in other areas now. . . media aren't an exception to historical forces. . . rather, the media are exemplary of them
What surprised me the most in reading about the history of American Journalism in Mightier than the Sword was that I wasn't surprised at all.
I was expecting some motivational stories like Kelsey had said but after reading and thinking about it, history is repetitive. There are still problems with race, gender, social roles, etc. The only things that are changing is the context, or lack there of. Today woman are still seen in most places and on paper as writing weaker then a man. Hence why women authors use initials, well known example, J.K. Rowling, to give off the idea or impression of a male author. So readers won't be too biased. Of course the ideas and opinions expressed throughout history were beautiful and motivating, but what else is there to say now?
Anything that we would like to write has been said or said in a better, more intelligent way before.
Maybe that is why we are moving to distracting things such as celebrity gossip, and such. There is no, or people are lazy to find, more ideas, issues, and opinions to speak about that haven't been said already.
I never really thought of a newspaper as a journal before reading the first chapter of Mightier than the Sword. I was surprised that the origin of news reporting began with Sam Adams merely documenting daily occurrences. His combination of facts and reactions formed the beginnings of journalism. Since then, it has much evolved.
One instance that surprisingly remains the same is a flaw noted on page 13 about a rape not being reported until months after its occurrence. Journalism must be timely; it's not considered relevant otherwise.
A modern example of this detailed in Mightier than the Sword regards the reporting of 9/11. The beginning reporting focused on what happened rather than why it happened. The reasoning didn't become clear until three weeks later when details still lacked. Up until this day, it's very vague why the 9/11 attacks occurred. I'm surprised that this possibility still occurs in modern journalism. I can understand how news wasn't always timely in the past when there weren't many means of getting the facts, but it's hard to believe this still occurs today. Like the journalism of the past, facts were documented on 9/11 to preserve the occurrence and inform the public- The New York Times even won awards on their reporting. In today's times, however, the news shouldn't just be a journal. It should serve as a catalyst, which is what I believe it has developed into with the developed uses of the internet.
the battle in journalism is often between following public opinion (that is, conventional thought and belief) and leading it. . . when the press fails to report on controversial subjects, it may be because the subjects aren't entertaining enough, but it also may be because to report on the subjects would offend audience
The most shocking passages of the book Mightier than the Sword had to be the consecutive sections of "Promoting Anti-Semitism" and "Defending the Nazis." The titles alone just hit you and then after reading, one can see how unjust and racially motivated the works of Father Coughlin truly were. As a priest, it is understandable that one would promote his own religion, yet to undermine the views and lifestyle of others in a global community with an already growing mindset of anti-semitism is unconscionable.
Father Coughlin in no uncertain terms called people of jewish faith a cancer to all other people of the world and explicitly blames them for the Great Depression. As an aspiring journalist, I take pride in the fact that others in this field took a stand against the bigotry and hatred being spewed by Coughlin over the radiowaves. It is unfortunate that it had to come from a liberal paper, which The Nation is described as in "Mightier than the Sword," because the anti-semetism was more an aspect of conservative life, but the fashion with which this particular paper displayed thier dismay and the attention it drew went beyond liberal or conservative and called out to all who believed in everyday moral living to start railing against Father Coughlin.
When initially reading these passages, I was immeasurably hurt and dissapointed to think that someone who was intrusted with addressing the nation with radio broadcasts, which at the time was a major part of "the media" and journalism, would so blatantly and hurtfully persecute those who were already in a state of pain because of the holocaust. This reminds me of how today, people such as Don Imus can say whatever he likes, reaching a broad audience, and ultimately just hurts people and spreads hate. Luckily, it has begun to become a more punishable offense, but that doesn't take away from the past offenses of those such as Father Coughlin.
I deeply enjoy “Mightier then the Sword”. It is far different then anything we have had to read so far in any class and although I love history, this book is so much more than a history lesson. The point of each story was to teach us something about the background of our future profession, but it also highlighted some facts we are never told about history in general. I found it amazing in the first chapter, how some of the published incidents that helped spark the revolution were actually untrue. I’m sure many colonists from the local areas had to have known that these incidents never happened as well.
As Mark says, it just goes to show how much of an impact the news can have weather it is true or not. Fortunately, in the case of the first chapter the outcome was something we prospered from. In current times, this is not usually the case. This case may reiterate the need for truth in journalism but not always the need for objectiveness.
there's an old saying in journalism (and i'm pretty sure no one taught you this either yet):
Don't let the truth stand in the way of a good story.
I always enjoy a good introduction, and Streitmatter did an excellent job explaining what to expect while reading his book. I have never been introduced to history from a “news media” perspective. This book gives good insight on how the media influenced people in the past and how it has always been very influential to those who follow it.
I was taken back with the chapter on The Civil Rights Movement. In class we have had discussions on today’s news and how much false information as been released to the public. I now find myself reading the newspaper and watching the news asking myself how much of it is true. Not realizing that there are honest people who are looking to report the truth. I found this chapter to be interesting because around the 1950s television news was rising and competing with print news. The Civil Rights Movement was so big that putting it in print alone would not be enough to nationalize the new breakthroughs that were taking place, and some refused to “publish news that might disturb the existing racial pattern.” (176) The section of “Knocking Down Walls in Little Rock” talked about the attention this story received due to the obsession from the media. This was the first time that people were able to witness an incident through their television sets. Regardless of how great a story may be written, newspapers are unable to show emotion and a persons heartache. This news story was able to get the attention of many people through the power of television and continued to be useful throughout The Civil Rights Movement.
I have always thought that there are advantages and disadvantages when it comes to the media. Reading incidents like this make me feel that the media and those who report news are not all bad. Those who become journalists must not forget why they entered the profession, it’s important to stay true to the public and yourself.
Sorry for the late response!!!
I like the way Mightier than the sword captured specific moments in time and helped us to re-live the moments as readers. What stuck out to me the most is how a lot of the book relates to what is happening today, but in an extreme way. I feel as if history is a never ending cycle no matter how much we try to stop and change that.
There are more liberal people who are willing to fight for what they believe is right for a more "utopian" society. (pg 17) It is seen with a lot of controversial issues like the fight for gay rights. People are using the internet, protests, journals, and the media in general as a way to express their opinion. Independence has taken off in its own direction. There are countries, individuals, and even small groups of people who want to be recognized as different and independent in their very own way. History has shaped our future in the most discrete ways. I like that this book goes back into history because before this I have heard of Common Sense and Thomas Paine, but today I view it with different eyes because it is relevant to what has happened to our culture.
The progression in the women's movement has definitely moved in a positive direction throughout history. There are still some discrimination, because many conservative people have passed down their stern and unchanging beliefs about how things should be.
In the end I think that everything worked to each other's benefit. With the right to vote came women being liberated and having a voice along with new forms of media, which helped society boom in an unexpected way. This book made me realize that somewhere along the road to progression people got carried away with becoming liberated that they lost the sense of culture.
Post a Comment