Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A popular government without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce, or a tragedy, or perhaps both. -- James Madison
“When a dog bites a
man that is not news,
because it happens so often.
But if a man bites a
dog, that is news.”
- Editor John B. Bogart, New York Sun
man that is not news,
because it happens so often.
But if a man bites a
dog, that is news.”
- Editor John B. Bogart, New York Sun
About Me
Followers
forthcoming
- "A Newspaper Is a Collection" (poem)
- "News Today" (music video)
- 20th Century Man
- A Walk Back Through a Day's New
- BBC Facebook Parody
- Breaking News
- Bullshit
- Citizen Journalism -- What Is It?
- Civil Rights Movement
- Class Project: Media Parody
- CNN War (music video)
- Colbert versus Keen
- Dead!
- Dirty Laundry (Remix)
- Electronic Book Burning
- F the CC (music video)
- FCCFU
- Future of Book Publishing
- Internet Art!
- Interview With Andrew Keen
- Journalism Back in the Day (short movie)
- Journalism?
- Locus Novus
- Logorama (short film)
- Monoculture
- Murrow Broadcast From London
- Neil Postman on Cyberspace (YouTube)
- New York Times Home Page
- Newsboys
- Newsboys Shooting Craps
- Newsies
- NPR (Your Brain on Computers)
- Penn & Teller on Marketplace of Ideas
- Penn & Teller's FCC
- Perez Hilton
- Postman Comic: Orwell vs Huxley
- Reconstruction of American Journalism
- See It Now
- Story of Electronics
- Story of Stuff
- The Yellow Kid
- Turkel
- Video Game Faces
- Whackamurdoch
- Who Owns the Media?
- Who Owns the Web?
- World of Blogging (music video)
18 comments:
I think the central problem for Nerone is that the history of journalism is writen as a single unit titled "American Journalism". For Nerone, journalism history should be tought in a way that expresses journalism as a "system of relationships". To be honest I really never thought about journalism history and how it was taought. After reading this essay I agree with Nerone. The news, journalism and the oress are all different and have different histories. It is not just one single unit that developed from the very simple smoothly to the present state today. Nerone wrote " Communication history can tell them that the present did not come simply and naturally from the past. It camd about through conflict and contest; its history is fraught with irony; its geneology is full of bastards adn miscongenation". I really liked this quote because it is right in saying that things do not naturally evolve, but it takes conflict to bring about the envolution, which I think can be used to describe journalism history in general.
I think this problem does relate to Mightier than the Sword. Mightier than the Sword gives a history of journalism by highlighting famous parts of the history. TO me this book does describe journalism as a single unit. On a positive note I think it does a good job showing some conflicts that have brought about change in journalism.
A main problem with journalism history is there is no one history of journalism. When history is taught in schools, children are primarily concerned with facts and specific instances that are considered important to know. However, these specific instances mostly concern those who have been dominant within the past, and a journalism history that focuses on the most powerful news sources of the time, lead by the wealthiest people who have centralized their certain beliefs and views with other similar newspapers as the most symbolic of justice and democracy. However, to think of journalism history only concerning those specific instances hinders education which theorizes and takes into account why these certain media sources were dominant. Nerone uses the example of Gone With The Wind and Roots as thought to share equal historic value because of the facts they reflect. However, it is the differences in the ideas behind these stories that really describe the history of that time, which depict two different viewpoints on the impact of the Civil War concerning race and society, not just the facts.
Mightier than the Sword, a book of journalistic history, describes the facts and stories of specific heroes that have made an impact on journalism and media of the present. I do think Mightier than the Sword presents these facts well, because although they do focus on those who had been at the forefront of journalism in terms of who was connected to the powerhouse newspapers of the time, it does account for the theoretical perspectives of why these people and events were important and different and how they affect todays journalism. But to not include the average journalist and the ongoings of the community newspapers and media sources of the past is to disregard a history that is of equal importance to the elite of the time, a criticism apparent in Nerone's essay.
What’s the old saying? “History is written by the winners” or something of the sort?
The idea that Nerone brings up, that history is argument and not fact, is the bigger problem behind most any history teaching. Much like we only learn about the facts of the atrocities of the Holocaust in World History classes and never really learn about the societal structure in Germany that allowed for the growth of the Nazi party, or of any of the real theories behind Nazism, we don’t tend to learn about the communities, philosophies or much of the political or social climate surrounding journalistic milestones. We discussed an example of this a little bit in class one day, when we wondered what the use of a “Rock History” class would be—well, if the class was taught not just through fact, but through examining the social climates from which the music sprung and reflect that on our own generation’s society/music rapport, it would be an incredibly useful class.
Essentially, Nerone thinks the biggest problem, and the reasoning behind saying there is no journalism history is that histories are not mutually exclusive—there is an overlap, with something like the broad “journalism history” being experienced and retold through many different groups (black, white, male, female, journalist, source, subject, etc.) This is not to say that complete division in recalling certain history doesn’t happen; sometimes with ones that occurred at the very same moment and place. Journalism history is dependent upon every other sort. There are hundreds of ways to tell a story, from a myriad of views, and in Nerone’s opinion, the history of the “press” in America doesn’t do justice to the entirety of the actual press in America because it sometimes only tells through one class of people—also connected to one of the first points made in class really, what IS the press in America?
By ignoring sub-cultural or minority papers, and adding them in as “me too” moments, journalism history has reduced much of the history to mere talking points, that propel the “winner” of that moment in history into the limelight. I think Streitmatter’s book certainly does that—he makes mention of the “me too” personages, but in passing when discussing larger issues. He does, as Liz says, make mention of why these “greatest hits” were important in the larger scheme of things, but it is still an injustice to focus only on a history that would most likely be taught somewhere else, if not in his book.
Nerone's argument as so well put in the past three posts, is that the history of American journalism as it is currently taught does not fully represent the true history of journalism in America. Like many histories it is a narrative of "his" "story, " that is the narrative of " white male reporters and editors." He goes on to point out that the telling of history always has a political agenda or angle as pointed out by the Gone With the Wind/ Roots example, therefore we get the sort of history that only has "me-too" add ons and does not fully commit to explaining the social atmosphere and pressures that accompanied them. Streitmatter of course is also guilty of this sampling of the American past by briefly examining some of the more major moments in American journalism history, but really omitting the minorities in history as a whole.
Nerone stated a few valid reasons why teaching the history of journalism has become a problem. Nerone identified the fact that students of the present have trouble absorbing the information as the central problem with journalism history. He lists various explanations of why this is so (one being that the past is gone, so why should we care about it?)He also mentions that in many books in regards to the development of journalism, only white males are epitomized. In correlation with that, he also discusses that "American Journalism" is grouped into one blob, when there are many different sectors of it.
The problem somewhat relates to Streitmatter's book because, after all, it is a book about historical journalistic events. However, Streitmatter discusses not only female journalists but African American journalists as well. After reading this book I can refute Nerone's article because I found the history of journalism (as written by Streitmatter) to be very interesting. As I mentioned in a previous blog about the book, it gave me hope for a future where journalists can report about things that really matter, not just gossip. I find the lack of interest in history a common thing among my peers, however, it can be hard to retain almost 230 years of information and events in a matter of 3 months or less. I still think that teaching the history of American Journalism is worthwhile and it should continue to be taught.
Nerone identifies that often the history of journalism is seen as a single entity, which it isn’t, because “the news media are not things in themselves but networks of relationships.” Often the history of journalism is told from a selective perspective. It will include, mostly, the giants in journalism and how they have shaped what journalism has become. The problem with this is that the smaller or more tabloid forms of journalism are not shown. Also, some forms of journalism have just been dashed out as irrelevant. One thing I found interesting was how Nerone pointed out that journalists are obsessed with facts and this hurts journalism history, since most “journalism historians” are journalists themselves. This is rather true for us, but when it leads to the telling of journalism history it doesn’t benefit us. This leaves out arguments and theories that could be made, but are placed aside as to not appear biased.
This problem does relate to “Mightier Than The Sword,” because the book is a collection of the greatest hits of journalism. Although, I don’t feel the book is trying to portray itself as anything but that. Too often this is where most journalism history books will stop. Once the overall entity of what journalism “should be” is formed that is where the history stops. “Mightier Than The Sword” does take time to point out problems within the history of journalism, which is one element that Nerone thinks journalism history fails at doing. It is good to see the positive and the negative with journalism history, because it shows how conflict has shaped what journalism is today. As Nerone said, journalism doesn’t naturally evolve, so it is important to show the history this way.
Nerone identifies the central problem with journalism history as the lack of social history in conjunction with that of a history of the chronology of major events in journalism history. He states that "journalism history is 'professional' and neglects 'social history,' both in terms of journalism's internal structure and of its place within the larger society." Without this information, I feel as though Nerone believes that students cannot fully understand the changes and trends within journalism because they do not know and understand the different social situations or conditions. I feel as though Nerone would particularly appreciate Streitmatter's "Mighter Than The Sword" because though it does give a chronology of important events in journalism history, the author also sets up each event by providing the reader with historical context of the situation. For example, in the chapter concerning Boss Tweed, Streitmatter provides an overview to the corruption of Boss Tweed, as well as a broad biography and updates of the social situation at his time.
I think one of the main problems Nerone discusses is how the history of journalism is taught. Instead of being taught in series of one history it should be taught as a "system of relationships". What stood out to me was when he mentioned how students are often just looking for the right answer or which answer they need to know for a test in school. As students we might look at something like the "me too" add on as more fact to the story when really its just another ones history that was happening at the same time.
Mightier then the Sword, i think does a good job at giving some of the facts of the actual history as well as talking about where the media fits into the total history. Streitmatter's book discusses how the role of the media throughout historical events has shaped these events or effected them, or how they were reported on. I think that is what makes up the history of journalism.
A respectable professor (not of journalism) from this school once said to me that objectivity does not exist. He explained that the concept of objectivity is a biased structure in itself because it asks someone to implement the concept in their thought process, which defeats the purpose of any supposed objective behavior. This concept came to mind while reading John Nerone’s discussion of journalism history. Reading Nerone’s description of this history, and history as an entire concept, was not easy because, his descriptions seem to refute the concept of history as collection of facts. This relates to my mention of objectivity because, as Nerone explains, journalists, just like historians, have their own bias as they all include different perceptions of facts that have been taught to them. Nerone uses muckrakers and partisan journalists to describe this. He says that “they are voices of the people. But they are not functionally equivalent. Between them there is no shared journalism,” or history. He also states that “a news medium is not a thing but a collection of networks,” which he suggests are manifested through a process of generalizing various concepts and opinions to form “facts”, facts that often still misrepresent a large amount of people. My interpretation of Nerone’s ideas in this essay is not easy to put together and explain because I am not sure I even understand his points as some of them seem to contradict, but that I think is part of his entire point….? The relationship of this discussion to Streitmatter’s book is honestly unclear to me, but it seems like Nerone is saying that Streitmatter’s 200 plus pages is a bunch of generalized crap with some random facts inserted for a look of authenticity.
John Nerone set in place what problems are faced with teaching “journalism history”. He dissects history and the role “The Press” plays in history and states that we consider the “press” as one entity when in actuality the press has taken form of many shapes.
Such as Streitmatter's book, Mightier Than the Sword. The book highlights key events in American history with Streitmatter’s view on which journalists were “important”. This then leaves out many “women, minority, media, religion and other groups and topics.” Neglecting to talk about women, other religions and groups is leaving out “social history”. Leaving the white male as the hero in most of our textbooks. This pattern of history has been taught for centuries in our country. No one listens because it is apart of history that is fact, non progressive. This is what we know and can not change, therefore leaving history as merely facts and points of time in the past.
This is the problem with journalism history and trying to teach history all together to students. It is taught on the perspective of sole facts. Instead it can be taught in a fashion where history is thought about. Sparks question, judgment,disagreement etc.History can and should be argumentative. It can be objective and change with different tones, judgment and narrative. History takes different forms depending on who is telling it. Therefore changing the perception of history to students, it is not just, “the present written back in time” as Nerone points out in his essay. If journalism history is presented as a changing period of many movements, medias, “presses”, and people then it can be seen as a force of liberation. History is not only about the past but it today, tomorrow and now.
It seems that the main problem Nerone has with the way journalism is taught, is that it is taught as a traditional history of chronologically sequenced events from the past to the present. It is taught as a single unit that symbolizes one thing when in fact is should be taught and viewed as a system of relationships, all interrelated that contribute in different ways to the way people view journalism and the news, the way they interpret it and also the way they utilize it. I think the example Nerone gave about how to view News as a system of relationships with the physical paper and tools necessary to create the newspaper, then the actual text, then what the text says, then where the information came from, then what the text addresses, etc. very clearly and accurately illustrated why it is so important to teach journalism as a system of separate entities that work together to deliver what we know as news. I never thought of news and journalism in that broken-down state, however it makes complete sense. Nerone also emphasizes that history is traditionally taught as a series of facts that one must remember in order to be educated (his example of "Will this be on the test?" is very accurate). Teachers of journalism and history focus too much on the details and facts instead of what these actually mean and how they have evolved over time. Facts are important to the field of journalism itself, however the history of journalism is not effectively translated if based solely on these. Mightier Than the Sword is essentially a chronological look at the major events of journalism, however I think Streitmatter's format works very effectively because while he gives basic facts and examples, he does what Nerone encourages, which is to show how these facts and events implicated society and the world as a whole. How the occurrences of history were propelled and pioneered by journalists and the news to affect society and aid its evolution on a much larger scale.
The central problem that Nerone identifies with journalism history is that it is usually written by journalists. This leads to a variety of problems because, as a result, journalism history tends to focus on stories and facts. The history of the press tends not to confront theories that may be intertwined with the stories and facts.
Nerone emphasizes that journalism history needs to explore relationships, specifically “past-present” relationships. The facts of stories need to be put into context, whether it is social, cultural or economical. Putting these stories into such contexts allows the history to explain the why’s and how’s of these events, in addition to the who, what, when and where.
In creating a context of understanding for these events, we can open up a dialogue for the discussion of journalism history. Streitmatter’s book, Mightier Than the Sword, alleviates, to some degree, the problems discussed by Nerone in his essay.
Streitmatter picked specific episodes in journalism history, and explained them in context to what was happening in society. By doing this, we can better analyze how the various presses in America function. The book creates a history that enables a dialogue.
The end of the book serves to create a “past-present” relationship in journalism, showing how the trends transcend throughout the history of the press. By understanding journalism history in context to what was going on at the time, we better understand how the press serves its readership, and on other occasions how the press undermines its readership.
The central theme of Nerone's article is that journalism does not have one specific history. Learning history in general is difficult because it is so complex. There are many different perspectives and as Nerone says "There is no definite limit to the number of true stories to be told about the past." Every person has their own history. The number of people involved in an event, even the people not involved, would all have to be accounted for in a full detail of an event. Historians decide what information they include in their works. They choose what is most important and from what angle to tell the story. They also have "me too" additions to history. They include people in a part of history without fully having their history.
I think that Mighter than the Sword relates to this. As a history of journalism, it does a good job of pointing out key events and shows many different points of view of the different topics. However, it, like any other historical text, is not complete. It would be impossible to gather all of the information to make a complete history of on event. Events rely heavily on what came before it and there are facts and points of view that we just cant get.
It is difficult to portray the true history of anything; the past is too vast and complex to be able to fit in one book - or 20. This makes teaching journalism difficult because different people put different emphasis on different events or views.
I think Nerone finds the central problem with not only journalism history, but history in general is that it is taught as facts when in reality it is the facts that are meant to provoke discussion and debate. He writes how students are taught specific dates that are relevant and important to history but are not taught the entire spectrum of it. The dates are taught and memorized but often just scratch the surface and not go further into it. I think this problem relates to Streitmatter's book, Mightier Than the Sword because it is teaching the facts of journalisms history. It is teaching the readers the few important people and eras that occurred. What happens next is that we have to dig deeper into these facts.
Nerone identifies the central problem with journalism history as the fact that there is no journalism history. Journalism historians tend to write about the history of journalism as a compilation of stories and facts, rather than engaging in the theory behind journalism. The problem with this is that facts can be over-emphasized and all students will care about learning is important names and dates that they may be tested on. History in general should not be thought about as a bundle of facts. Streitmatter is at fault in writing his book, Mightier Than the Sword, in that he gives a "greatest hits" of American history. He compiled a bunch of prolific and notorious names and gave a brief background of who they were and how they shaped specific mediums such as newspapers, radio and television. Streitmatter's book completely contradicts Nerone's points of view. Nerone feels that history should be looked at as a relationship between the past and present. He claims that journalism historians should move away from trying to create one single narrative that tries to put together the pieces that reveal the underlying truth about journalism and its history in this country. Nerone feels that journalism historians should help our students "reason historically about their world and their place in it." If this cannot be achieved, then they are being "ill-served" and will only follow the disappointing and meaningless conventional journalistic practices of today.
John Nerone identifies not onoly the problem in teaching jounralism history but of teaching history in general. Although he focuses on the issue in journalism history of resulting in what makes modern jorunalism seem mature, he says that history, in general terms, is "a way of thinking about the facts". He criticizes historians for being too political, often makiong histiry a series of "me too" events where minorities ared added into a narrative in a manner of them being more important then they actually were.
Nerone says that the problem of journalism histtory lies in its representation of the press as singualar. He believes that the history of journalism leaves out some of the less significant types of journalism at different times. I think that Rdger Streitmatter, in "Mightier Than the Sword" successfully depicts journalism history without being singular. Instead of breaking up the history into time periods. he breaks the history up into the different types of jourenalism that occured in American history. This allows us to see where two types of journalism overlapped and how contemporary jounrnalism is not much more mature than its forefathers.
Post a Comment