absence of malice blog...no sugar coat
I am not in the mood to sugar coat my opinions on the movie this evening. I was unable to see the second half of the film but I am sure that I have enough opinions on the half that I did see to get my point across. I thought that the movie was extremely over exaggerated and melodramatic. I know the intent of the movie was to prove the important and often drastic decisions made by journalists everyday but I do feel that this point could have been pointed out to us in a more realistic manner. It is a good movie for the general public but I do not think that it is suitable as an educational tool for students of journalism. The general public more often than not will not even stay wake throughout a movie unless someone dies and something gets blown up. Now I can not speak for every student in the communications school but I personally don't need the drama and actually feel that the soap opera antics threw me off of what I should have been learning from the movie. I did try to see past Paul Newman ripping off a shivering Sally fields white blouse and the fabulous decade representative outfits and pick up on some important issues in regards to journalism ethics. We as journalists have a responsibility to report the complete and unbiased truth at all times but me must always remember that before you have the responsibility of a journalist, you have the responsibility of a human being. Oddly enough, this lesson is not taught in universities. This lesson is usually taught at the age of five, right in between nap time and finger painting....I believe that golden rule mentioned something about not doing anything to another that you wouldn't want done to you. This rule applies in life everyday and in journalism. Sally Field sold out herself along with a few others in her quest for the "truth" and the "story". Many journalists get so caught up in deadlines and selling papers that they forget that they are writing about real people. They dig and expose and although we need investigative journalism for watchdog purposes, we must remember to watch out for that line. That thin line that can often be so easily avoided but when crossed can damage so many lives and reputations. We must take into account that spoken words are often fleeting yet a printed word last forever and effects anyone who reads it. It is this aspect of journalism that draws so many to the field and drives so many others away. I suppose that the movie taught a lesson in the end. I simply did not appreciate having to "dig" through the drama to find it.

2 Comments:
Danielle, while the movie did go out of its way to make points, I do think it is - as a movie - a good opportunity to provide talking points for journalists. When this movie came out, journalists all over the country talked about it - journalistically. Many, like you, thought it went overboard because obviously good journalists know the basics. But if you look at journalism practices today, you would think that these lessons are not as obvious as you think.
Your comment about the golden rule is 100% true. Sally Field disobeys that rule and it comes back to bight her. I completely agree that journalism operates in the same fashion, if you don't want something written improper about you, give a proper quote, or let it be known that something is off the record. If a journalist decides to disobey this general rule, then he/she is an unethical person and will not last long.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home