This appeared here and my thanks to Alan for allowing me to publish his work. RK
On the last day of 2014 I received a lapel pin from
the Society of Professional Journalists in honor of my having been a member
since 1979, thirty-five years ago. I confess I was a little stunned to think I
had been an editor and reporter that long ago. Indeed, I had been one for
several years even before I joined the Society.
I doubt that today’s generation of young
journalists have ever used a manual typewriter nor know what it feels like to
hold the pieces of metal that a linotype machine created to make a column of
newsprint.
In theory journalism still has the same objectives;
to get the facts and tell the story as objectively as possible.
Today, however, journalism has become far more subjective and the issue of bias blazes off the pages and from the television screen in terms of the selection of the events that are reported and the facts selected to be the news.
Today, however, journalism has become far more subjective and the issue of bias blazes off the pages and from the television screen in terms of the selection of the events that are reported and the facts selected to be the news.
There is an old saying in newsrooms that reporters
are liberal and editors are conservative, but these days much of what appears
on editorial pages and in the print and broadcast news is a blatant liberal
interpretation of what is or is not news.
This old journalist cannot escape the feeling that
what we are reading much of the time is little more than a government press
release handout. Sadly, I think we are witnessing a significant reduction
of investigative journalism in the mainstream media. Fortunately that void is
filled in these days by Internet sites that focus on various elements of the
news occurring in the nation and the world.
It was not, for example, a journalist who
discovered the truth about Jonathan Gruber and his role in creating ObamaCare.
He's now famous for calling voters "stupid."
These days, according to the Pew Research
Journalism Project, “Even at a time of fragmenting media use, television
remains the dominant way that Americans get news at home, according to a (2013)
Pew Research Center analysis of Nielsen data. And while the largest audiences
tune into local and network broadcast news, it is national cable news that
commands the most attention from its viewers.”
I suspect that the many new
communications technologies will be the means by which people will get their
news from ipads and similar devices. I feel positively ancient when I open the
print edition of The Wall Street Journal, but I wouldn’t want to read it any
other way. The same applies to reading a book.
In his 1970 book, “Future Shock”, Alvin
Toffler warned that by the year 2000, technological advance would come so fast
that they will actually make people’s lives more complex, not less. He called
it “information overload” saying “Millions of ordinary, psychologically normal
people will face an abrupt collision with the future, which will lead to
distorted perceptions of reality, confusion, and fatigue.”
Now ask yourself if you’ve become accustomed to
people walking down the sidewalk apparently talking out loud to themselves when
in fact they are on a cell phone? Indeed, I rarely get in an elevator or go
anywhere without seeing people who are looking at a device in their hand with
which they are checking their email or conversing with someone. They are,
however, literally cut off from any inter-relation with anyone around them,
often oblivious to what is occurring.
Think now of how many passwords, remote
controls, onboard navigation systems, and Internet search engines with which
you interact every day. These are all relatively new technology even though
they may seem to have always existed to millennials and younger folk.
Another futurist, R. Buckminster
Fuller, an American philosopher and architect—inventor of the geodesic
dome—predicted that by the year 2000, the world would have figured out how to
eliminate poverty and hunger. We have made great progress with regard to
growing abundant crops, but of course those who hate and fear any new way to
benefit society are presently campaigning against genetically modified crops
(GMOs). They are safe but many large food providers like McDonald’s are giving
into the pressure from groups who claim they pose a health threat. They do not.
Demands that GMO elements be listed on product labels are part of a despicable
campaign against this extraordinary agricultural technology that enhances,
protects, and increases crops.
As for poverty, Fuller’s prediction did
not come true. The future that has arrived since he made the prediction
requires a higher level of education for most jobs and computer skills to
perform them. If you’re poor, you face an immediate obstacle trying to learn
how to operate and own a computer.
At the same time, robots have replaced
workers such as bank tellers. When I call customer service these days, I
generally end up talking to a machine. Isaac Asimov, one of the 20th
century’s most highly regarded science fiction writers, predicted in 1942 that
robots would be so ubiquitous that he proposed “Three Laws of Robotics.” The
prime law was that a robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction,
allow a human being come to harm. We haven’t quite reached the point Asimov
envisioned, but we are getting there.
In terms of how new technologies have
occurred in my lifetime, it is fair to say that the future is arriving even
more swiftly than it did in the past.
My Mother who at age 98 had lived
through virtually the entire last century recalled how amazed she was when a
box with earphones was her introduction to the first radio. Born in 1903 when
the first Wright Brothers plane flight occurred, she lived to see men rocket to
the Moon and airplane travel largely replace trains. 1903 was also the year
Henry Ford founded his company and five years later began to roll out the first
Model T. Affordable automobiles transformed American society.
Since we live in an era of change we
are often unaware of how greatly the newest technology will affect our lives,
but we know we want to have it and use it. That is why, if I may return to my
starting point, it is ever more essential that the news that journalists
provide is even more important to our lives in terms of how accurately they
report the changes affecting it.
Alan Caruba, 2015
No comments:
Post a Comment