Thoughts on… “Defending the News” in American Carnival by Neil Henry

I very much enjoyed reading Neil Henry’s fifth chapter in the book where he discusses journalism in the age of new media. Although he was slightly long-winded, Henry wrote clearly in very real language. He made me think a lot about the industry and about my future in a new age of journalism. I could see myself reading more of his book. Throughout the chapter, I found myself, at times, agreeing with Henry, and at other times, outright opposing him. I’d like to address one issue that was an overall tone in this chapter:

Henry discusses, or rather, complains at length about the effect of “new media” on aspiring journalists in the age of blogging. He seems to believe that the new generation of journalists- bloggers and citizen journalists, etc. – are too worried about their own opinions and commentary of news events, rather than the news itself. Henry says that the media industry is becoming flashier, and more openly opinionated than in the past. He seems to prefer curiosity-driven objectivity as the basis of reporting.

But Henry also talks about giving the people what they want. (According to him, this is why his university offers so many digital classes and added a new school on citizen reporting.) And I believe that people do want color and commentary in their news today. With so many outlets for news, they look for something to entertain them or stand out from the pack. How else would they ever be able to choose?

As one who loves to write opinion and commentary, I disagree with Henry when he keeps referring to my generation as a generation who simply reacts to the news in their writing and blogging. Rather, I constantly choose to present my material differently, because that is what catches people’s attention. This does not mean that I haven’t been a witness to the event, a careful observer, or any of the things that make a diligent reporter. It just means that I, along with many others in my generation, choose to descriptively report the event. We are not trying to over dramatize it. It means that I choose to bring my audience to the event itself through my words, my media, and my images. We are over the simple presentation of news to our audience. I also choose to explain why people should care about these things I have seen and found out. I choose to objectively explain my feelings on issues that normal citizens don’t have the time or means to have feelings about.

Henry was more on-point when he acknowledged that objectivity was always the guise for subtle subjectivity… and I don’t believe that subjectivity hurts anyone. If every reporter is just a little subjective, there will be a fresh perspective on every issue and the news will never be taken over by “new media”. The blogs, the social networks, the whatever-they all add to the intrigue of the real news. In my opinion, they do not dilute the news. These new mediums-with all their flashiness of opinion- engage people in dialogue and inspire them to think outside the box.

And if it takes a little edge now-a-days to differentiate your news from someone else’s news, I don’t think there is any harm. I think Henry should have given Applicant X, trying to gain admission into his prestigious journalism school, a little more credit for her opinions and her risk in expressing opinion. Maybe Henry or alumni interviewer should have done a little more in-depth reporter on Applicant X. Because I thought that Ms. “Admit” seemed sweet and curious enough. But from what Henry divulged, her essay was more of the same predictable material people write to get into grad school. Rather, it is those with an edge (those like Applicant X) who are the next generation of successful reporters.