Since our last class I keep picturing the girl fight video that we watched and asking myself the same question, Is it journalism? According to Dan LaFave, “If someone didn’t know something and they’re interested in it, and you bridge that gap, that’s journalism.” I have to agree with LaFave on this one. Journalists are supposed to report on what’s happened. So if the story is true, and you report on it and it gets published, that’s technically journalism. I think instead we need to ask ourselves what kind of journalism this is. Are these really the kinds of things we want to take seriously?
Then again, we’ve created an entire industry on getting off of other people’s humiliation. There’s no question, embarrassment sells big. And news mediums need the money. Videos are flashy. And they are easy. I love to read books, but I hate reading long articles/blogs online. I love Reddit, I go on it everyday. If you haven’t heard of it, check it out. But I will admit, I won’t click on titles that are more than a few lines long. If a link takes me to a long article, I’ll skim or read the first few paragraphs. If a video takes too long to download, i’ll just hit the back button and move on to the next post. As Huber said in class, “Who reads words anymore?”
Most of the people who viewed the girl fight post, only looked at the headline and watched the video. Hardly anyone read the actual content of the article. They did not get the context or relevance of the story. I think we need to decide what kind of journalism is truly important, and then actually read that news thoroughly and objectively, so we can form our own well-informed opinions.