Some thoughts on journalism [Note: Content Warning - links to reports on bigotry/hate, violence/abuse/war. Reader discretion is advised]

Note: CONTENT WARNING - some of this content is about upsetting, disturbing or triggering events & attitudes. Seek competent help - including professional - if you need it. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised that linked articles may contains names and/or images of deceased people. READER CAUTION IS RECOMMENDED! For anyone distressed by anything in this post, or for any other reason considering seeking support, resources are available in Australia here, here, and here. In other nations, you will have to do an Internet search using terms such as “mental health support - <your nation>” (which, for instance, may lead to this, this, and this, in the USA, or this, this, and this, in France [biased towards English-language - my apologies]), or perhaps try https://www.befrienders.org/. 

One of the most important duties of journalists is to provide reporting from areas that citizens cannot get to - for example, reporting from the field of war. This can counter government ... well, government propaganda - or, at the very least, the sort of deception that was infamously shown during the Vietnam/American (depending on your side) war, as was made clear by the exposé of the Pentagon Papers. 

An example of that sort of reporting is the following: 

• “Gaza is the most miserable place on Earth and in Israel, fear is everywhere. This tragedy cannot go on”   https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-23/gaza-most-miserable-place-israel-fear-tragedy-cannot-go-on/103002648   The description of the widespread, deep fear in Israel is striking   

This sort of reporting, however, can be limited by the limitations on access that journalists experience - as was notable and notorious during the Iraq War. 

That sort of limitation can, to some extent, be overcome by another important type of journalism: analysis, commentary and oversight. 

An excellent example of that sort of reporting is: 

• “No matter how serious the issue, nuance becomes a thought crime for the Coalition’s court jesters”   https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/oct/21/no-matter-how-serious-the-issue-nuance-becomes-a-thought-for-the-coalitions-court-jesters  

Another example of the contrasts between two styles of journalism is in episode 8 of the 1998 HBO Series “From the Earth to the Moon”, where: 

• a young hotshot reporter goes to some lengths that are unsettling to the older journos to obtain human interest aspects of the Apollo 13 mission, while 
• the older journos insist that oversight and context, including technical facts, are important.
  

They are both right ... and both wrong: it is the two together that comprise the sort of accurate information flow that modern democracies need. 

And that is where modern journalism becomes so problematic, because of the bias of platforms such as the notorious Murdoch press, and the incompetence of the press council and programmes commenting on the performance of the media (especially regarding trans+ issues, where they seem to have regressed to the 1950s or 40s). 

What is the solution? 

I don’t know ... ideally, a good independent platform (The Guardian in Australia meets that, largely, but in the UK has transphobic aspects - other independent media in Australia are good, but lack market penetration).

A government or official service would be inherently suspect ... The Conversation is a good option, and is getting more market penetration, but on its own is not enough ... 

Something like the Royal Commission into the Murdoch media that many people (including myself) are advocating for could help ... 

Whatever is done regarding the media, improving critical thinking in citizens is crucial - and that, unfortunately, can ONLY be done effectively by improving Emotional Intelligence as well, including the willingness to change personally ... 

If anyone is interested, there is a good online resource on what journalism should be at https://www.thenewsmanual.net/.

 

Assumptions / basis 

In writing this, I have assumed / started from the following: 

• this blog states quite clearly that it is about political and human rights matters, including lived experience of problems, and thus I will assume readers are reasonable people who have noted the content warning in the post header;

Possible flaws 

Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider:

• there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan  Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking”; 
  
• I could be wrong - so keep your thinking caps on, and make up your own minds for yourself.
  

 

If they are of any use of interest, the activism information links from my former news posts are available in this post. 

 

If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below.

Remember: we need to be more human being rather than human doing, and all misgendering is an act of active transphobia/transmisia that puts trans+ lives at risk.