I found Russell Wangersky’s column (Activism and facts, Sept. 15) presented some interesting points about reporters imposing their views on the stories they report. In my mind, a journalist's view of the story they report is and should be irrelevant. Unbiased integrity is the keystone of a great journalist. These are the journalists I strive to follow, but lately, have found them increasingly hard to find. The idea of public shaming someone who does not fall under the reporters' beliefs seems to have taken priority over journalistic integrity.
The advent of activist journalism is creating a crisis in the media, which many media elite have failed to recognize. Easy to spot, it is easier to debunk in this internet age with a click and point on your screen. An example is the practice of taking a short phrase out of a speech to discredit a person making the speech. This is despicable but can be easily checked upon. Most speeches by public figures are videotaped and easily tracked down online. Not telling the whole story is a form of lying and undermines the credibility of the journalist.
Another example is media reporting on a sensational story another media is reporting. Not to say everything reported is untruthful, but some of the headlines are so outrageous they invite disbelief. A rush to get the story out does not lend credibility to an organization, especially if the story turns bogus.
In recent years, print media have decried the loss of advertising and circulation revenues, while running to the government to save their industry. I believe the solution lies within the media itself. People are already tiring of activist journalism and looking for an organization with strong news integrity. People will gravitate to a media source they trust. Fair, honest reporting, begets strong followers, which should grow advertising and circulation revenues.
Russell is right! A journalist who think they are superior to their audience, does so at their own peril.
Ed McKenna,
St. Peters Bay
