Journalism is not Activism

Journalism is Not Activism

There is a reason newspapers have a specific section for ads. Journalists are not advertisers, nor are they activists, or propagandists of any kind. What’s the difference? Advertisers, activist, and propagandists all fall into the same general category; they push the audience to think their way. They have perfected the art of persuasion. Journalists, on the other hand, give information in a non-persuasive, hard-up facts kind of way allowing the reader to get information and make decisions for themselves.

Sometimes it is difficult to write from this point of view though. Especially if you’re attached to the topic or subject in some kind of emotional way; be it that you’re involved, in charge of it, or living it. Sometimes the writer will put in false dramatizations which then make the story incorrect. They may not have said anything that was necessarily wrong, but the context and dramatic ways in which the situation was portrayed becomes a way of “rooting for” a specific side of the story. False reference is also a way that journalists can become activists. Referring to a person, place, or thing in a derogatory way, or with a connotation that is negative will sway the reader to think like you. Or this can be done in reverse, to refer to a person, place, or thing in a way that makes them seem special or better than the rest is also a form of false reference. If a journalist becomes too involved with those that they cover these underlying forms of activism can come through their writing without them even knowing that it is there.

Much of the journalistic goal is to stay unbiased in our writing. We know that this is impossible; no one can be completely unbiased in every situation. But to be as much as humanly possible journalists must stay independent from the people and the situations that they report on.