Time was, using the term "lie" would get the user punched out. And when TV commentators used it, they would apologize. Moreover, news announcers rarely used it at all, and apologized in advance when they had to play a recording of it.
Now, however, a certain major politician uses the word regularly, often and emphatically, so any attempt to diminish its effect on listeners is pointless.
There comes a time in journalism when it is essential to report clearly and accurately what a politician says. This is a sound policy, but we now live in abnormal times.
Note: That time comes sooner and more often when a politician regularly insults reporters by regularly using the term "stupid," as when saying on live television to a network journalist, "That's a stupid question."
Comment: There are indeed some questions that can be termed "stupid." But realistically, and in the context of neutral journalism, there are only stupid answers.
There can be leading questions, designed to help a speaker focus. Even so, this can work two ways -- to help or to entrap. Journalism's duty is to report accurately and completely what a politician or government official says. There is no need for anger. Just report what the politician says. There is no need to report the question. Journalism's duty is to report the answer.
Or as the old guideline in the PR industry puts it, "Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel."
But when a politician regularly insults reporters, they can respond by quoting clearly and accurately just what the politician says. They don't clean up the grammar or clarify any confusing phrase. They will report exactly what the politician says as well as the way he says it, without cleaning up the grammar or clarifying any unclear phrases.
The pen is mightier than the sword.
This can explain why a certain national political figure has few friends in the news media. Either way, reporters should not be friends with politicians. They can and should be friendly. But that's all.
No comments:
Post a Comment