Covering Race

Race relations is one of the hairiest topics that journalists cover. Not because it's an uncommon issue, but because it's tough to provide balanced coverage for each camp without taking sides--consciously or not. Nothing really gets the vitriol flowing like an argument about racial injustice, and news organizations can profit from higher TV ratings by over-covering the story.  

Think back to the George Zimmerman--Trayvon Martin case. NBC was caught editing Zimmerman's 911 dispatch call that was originally this:

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.

Dispatcher: OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?
Zimmerman: He looks black.

...and changed it to this:   

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.

There can only be two reasons behind NBC's decision to edit the tape. Either; 1)NBC, as a liberal news organization, wanted George Zimmerman to be found guilty, or; 2)NBC saw the racially charged debate as good for ratings. Framing the tape to paint Zimmerman as an explicit racist would create more buzz about the story and more viewership for NBC.

Personally, I think it's the latter, which is the reasoning Zimmerman's lawyers gave when they sued NBC. Providing erroneous reports to push a certain angle for ratings are obviously irresponsible and unethical. Which is why it's so scary that some are willing to do it anyway.    

   

The Boston Bombing Coverage

As I've said before, there have been only a handful of news events that qualify as "I'll always remember where I was at" moments. The Boston Marathon bombings became one of those events because of the fluidity of the situation. This was the first gargantuan story to be covered instantaneously by social media innovations like twitter and Facebook, putting pressure on newspapers and networks to be the first to break news. The "be first before being correct" mindset led to a number of blunders, most notably the New York Post's decision to accuse two "bag boys" as responsible for the horrific bombings, and then to publish a picture of them on their front page. The Post's claim, of course, was completely erroneous, as the men pictured had nothing to do with the act of terror.

Perhaps not as egregiously off the mark, CNN's continuous coverage of the Boston manhunt nevertheless drew criticism and ridicule, most memorably by Comedy Central's Jon Stewart in this piece of work.

It's safe to say that CNN will follow the other major networks' suit in the future by having an anchor live in the studio to quarterback the coverage of breaking news, no matter how loud "canine dogs" are barking. 

The instant news era is fully upon us. Reporters are breaking stories at a rate that continues to accelerate. Just be sure to verify before hitting the "tweet" button. 

The Future of News

The future of news has come into question as of late. Newspaper readership has dwindled since the turn the century when new technology began pumping out alternative media outlets the way CBS pumps out new Survivor seasons. "Traditional journalism's" fall from grace, with newsroom cutbacks and diminished coverage, not only happened comprehensively, but also really quickly. If you had told me back in 2003 that in ten years the majority of Americans would be getting news from tweets in their twitter account, I would probably have imagined some Hitchcock-like world where birds have taken over the press. 

But evolution isn't always bad, is it? It's not that Americans have become disinterested with the news, it's just the way they choose to consume it has changed. The problems occur when people are only exposed to quick, 30 second snippets and clips of news, which tend to distort or over exaggerate the issues. So in order to keep the consumer informed, journalists must be able to provide both quality and quantity. Video clips should be comprehensive enough to give the issue the weight it deserves. Reporters can also break down large, complicated stories into a stream of compressed tweets, which can be shared with their followers. Interaction is another huge advantage that journalists didn't have in the past. By providing ways for consumers to interact in the news process, people will have a greater interest in the news.

We won't always know what the future of news will look like. But there will always be a market for stories--for the drama of news. With that in mind, the future of news reporting is bright.