Still catching up..."He Said, She Said" journalism

While reading this analysis of "He Said, She Said" journalism, a couple key points stuck out for me, personally. It should be noted that I am not a journalism student, and therefore I have no formal education about journalistic practices or theories. Reading this article as a layperson not familiar with the field does give me a slightly different perspective, however.

First, I recognized immediately that I have no real understanding of journalism or journalistic practices. To be honest, I get all of my news from NPR or the internet. It's probably sad to hear for many of you, but I am one of many who've never read newspapers consistently. I'm from Ann Arbor, and we used to get the Ann Arbor news; the only section I read for several years with any consistency was the Entertainment section, simply because that was what I was interested in. When I would get news before I started listening to NPR, it would be from television reporting or from magazines like TIME. And herein lies my point, I find that this "he said, she said" practice is particularly absent from magazine publications and especially from NPR. Both publications make the effort to take a stand on issues, even when they present both sides. Reporting is researched, and often, after a news story is reported, the articles/reports cite sources for readers/listeners; sources that lead to more information and knowledge. This is the type of reporting I will always advocate. While I understand that in the past, newspapers were where the public predominantly got their news, and strict deadlines held reign, forcing this "he said, she said" journalism to become common practice, today, I feel that if traditional newspapers want to survive amidst all the competition (internet, radio, etc.) that the only way to rise above is by loosening deadlines, allowing for reporting that isn't hastily put together and written to find a middle ground; replacing it with reporting that is thoroughly researched and well-written.

I also find the excuse "research takes too much time" to be lame. (Again, note that this opinion is an example of NOT writing with "he said, she said" journalism, BUT this is the opinion of someone that has absolutely no idea what it is like to write for a newspaper!) Before the internet, I can see this excuse carrying weight. I often wonder myself how in the world was any scientific advancement made without easy access to research! With a few clicks and searches, I can easily have dozens of journals and archives available to me, thanks to the magic of the internet. I have a hard time accepting the excuse that journalists can't find the time to clarify their reporting with such easy access to information.

Finally, I feel that the article is also missing a huge point. But, this could be because journalists are so focused on preserving the newspaper as their main medium. As an outsider looking into the dilemma of fading newspapers, and as someone who never read newspapers, I feel that journalists are spending too much time bemoaning newspaper writing, arguing about content and practice, and refusing to open their eyes to the many opportunities that have and still are arising in the wake of collapsing newspapers. I mentioned NPR earlier, and as an avid listener, I feel radio and other audio mediums, such as podcasts, are a severely underestimated source for journalists. This type of reporting allows consumers to get their news in ways that are easier than newspaper--anywhere that a portable audio player can be taken and used is a place that consumers can get their news. And many people understand and retain information better from listening to it, rather than reading it. And, again, there is the almighty Internet. What the Internet is severely lacking is BALANCED reporting, that does analyze both sides of an argument, factually and rationally, while still presenting a viewpoint. What abounds on the Internet is biased writings on personal blogs and ridiculous memes (balloon-boy overkill, anyone?). With electronic readers like Kindle, and new advancements every day, electronic writing may eventually be the only form of writing left at some point. Don't get me wrong, I am a fan of the printed word, (I would LOVE to have my own Dewey Decimal system for my personal library one day!) but at least this movement would save trees! I do feel that traditional newspapers do have their place, and that is in LOCAL reporting. When I want to look up what times the local haunted house is open this Halloween, I turn to a local newspaper. This type of information can only easily be consumed in this manner. Local television news covers the same information, but in my opinion, it is just really depressing to watch, simply because it seems televised local news really focuses on crime reporting over nearly everything else, and man, that stuff can get a girl feeling low!

Anyways, I know I've rambled on a bit, but I hope that my opinions and thoughts are at least different from others' and that perhaps my view as an outsider may give a few of you journalism majors some thought.