The Press as a Historian

“What is a journalist? He is … the ‘historian’ of the moment, and truth must be his primary concern… (He should) offer an ethical corrective in the form of a concern with objectivity.... What is a practical necessity for the historian becomes an imperious law for the journalist...”   (Camus, 2005)

This famous phrase by Nobel Prize winning author, journalist, and philosopher Albert Camus, in his book Camus at Combat, explains what journalism should be. But questions arise about what journalism truly is. Does the ‘imperious law’ always apply? Most importantly, in the present day world of fast paced journalism, where stories grow stale by the hour (if not minute), can the media still be the historians of the moment?

Debates regarding the role of journalists as historians have raged on ever since the emergence of mass media. While the role of journalism is defined by some as the “Historian of the present, servant of future historians, and mediator of history” (Lavoinne, 1994), many historians like Antony Beevor believe that “journalism has spoilt the ground for historians” (Beevor, 2010). Despite the numerous questions around the distinction between the roles of a historian and that of a journalist, one thing that cannot be denied is the role of media as the makers and shapers of memories, a platform through which the world today “gains an understanding of the past, present and the possible future” (Kitch, 2006).

 Can journalists ever be called Historians? Medievalist historian Jacques Le Goff judged that if journalists “do their job well” they are “real historians of intermediate history” (Chauveau & Tetart, 1992). Zelizer, in her book, explains the interdependency of journalism and memory work saying that just as journalism needs memory work to position its recounting of public events in context, so too does memory need journalism to provide the most public drafts of past (Zelizer, 2008). Journalists have often contributed to this need of making ‘public drafts of past’ through commemorations, historical analogies, historical contexts (Edy, 1999) as well as a personal, a visual and a collectable articles and memorabilia (Kitch, 2006). Further, Kitch makes it clear, through her case study about the Times Inc., that the convergence of history and journalism can be highly popular and profitable. However she argues that confluence is not a result of a purely commercial venture, “something more is going on …. Especially at a time when media are a primary source of what most people know about history” (Kitch, 2006).
 However one can’t help but be concerned about the extent of media’s adherence to truth and objectivity of historical content, media being a profit making structure, when billions of dollars come to play. Terms like propaganda, soft censorship etc. often makes us anxious about the influence of powerful entities over media, corrupting the content to show only a perspective of the entire truth. This is perhaps one of the reasons as to why a segment of people assume that “(journalism) provides a first, rather than a final, draft of the past, leaving to the historians the final processing of the journalism’s raw events” (Zelizer, 2009).

Media is the main source from which people get to know about one’s history and form a collective memory that influences their social identity. Commemorative stories and magazines special issues can help remind people about the past, “a reminder of where we have been, and where we can go” (Rather, 2000). Historical analogies can help us understand and predict the probable future outcomes of a particular situation.  Looking back, giving an historical context to a story often helps the audience understand the circumstance better. The story looks well researched, impartial, and authentic. But again, the objectivity of media in reporting an event from the past is debatable. If the media is under any political/ corporate influence, its views on history may also be skewed. For example, in India, the current leading political party Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP) often tries to portray the tenure of 10^th Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee as the one which showed the most growth. The current, chief opposition Indian National Congress (INC) emphasizes on the tenure of 6^th Prime Minister Late. Rajiv Gandhi to be the model that should be followed. The news media which are inclined towards either of the political parties, indirectly frame the news to reflect the party’s beliefs. In other words, the viewers get slowly polarized into believing the superiority of either of the two different perspectives to the country’s political history.  

However, in this 21^st century, we have to focus on another form of media. The PEW Research Center review of the State of Media in 2015 shows a clear boom of online media, and steady retreat of traditional ones. Digital media, Facebook, Twitter, and blogs are slowly becoming the most widely used source of news updates. The huge storage capability and design and searching capabilities can help bring a revolution to formation of collective memory. For the first time ever, any news, or record, or post on any topic are permanently stored in the cyberspace and can be retrieved and recirculated by ordinary citizen. While many see social media as a platform handing the power of creating history, and choosing historical perspectives   to the common citizen, others may argue that the content shared on social media are mostly sourced from digital versions of traditional media.

To conclude, while the objectivity of news reporting is debatable, the role of news in influencing the collective memory is undeniable. Whether news media can or should be the ultimate draftsman of the history of people is controversial, but the role of media as the important first draftsman of history is unquestionable. Perhaps media’s take on this matter can be understood through the words of Daniel Bilalian, the news anchor of Antenne 2 Channel’s evening news, as he covered live the East Germans flocking through the newly breached Berlin wall. He announced:

“We do not have the historian’s stamp of approval to enable us to produce perfect report, but we would like to let you live the historic moment as they happen.”                                               (Bilalian, 1989).

Follow @USERNAME

The Press as a Commercial Enterprise

The Founding Fathers regarded press as the fourth estate of society (Nicholas& McChesney, 2006). Many researchers and even the Supreme Court, in matters of Freedom of Press, has argued strongly for the “necessity of the press as the essential underpinning of our constitutional republic” (Nicholas & McChesney, 2009). However with the change of times there has been a profound change in the role and function of journalism. News, many argue, has changed from being a ‘reflection of reality’ to a commodity which is ‘manufactured’ to maximize profits and fit to the demands of the market to help gather special interests (McManus, 1999). Nicholas and McChesney further express their disappointment that despite tremendous discussions on the fall in standard of journalism, research has mostly taken place “on the symptoms rather than providing remedies.” Through this reflection note I aim to enlist both the symptoms indicated in the readings and discussing some possible solutions based on existing media structures around the world.

In a free market press system is the press truly free? If not, who influences the press? Herbert Gans has answered “news media is caught in a tug of war between powerful news sources and consumers.” Other researchers have pointed out other forms of influence such as political party, powerful sources, and influence of the environment. McManus argues strongly that the chief influencers are “the major investors and owners.” Many researchers have also blamed the new media for the steady demise of the traditional media systems. The same situation has been reflected in the PEW Reports 2015 where a steady rise in digital media can be observed along with a gradual decline in popularity of print, cable etc. Bagdikian writes that “in the reign of the new media cartel, the integrity of much of the country’s professional news has become more ambiguous than ever.”  However researchers like Pickard have been less critical of new media. According to him the internet is not “challenging legacy media , rather supplementing it by smaller niche audiences, or finding a place in the ecosystem as suppliers of niche content to bigger media outlets” (Pickard, 2014). Nevertheless he has critiqued the business models of newspapers trying to tap the digital environment. He states that each platform requires clear distinct strategies and effective revenue models (Pickard, 2009). Isaacton prescribes micropayments for online content ( Isaacton , 2009). Nicholas and McChesney emphasizes on the necessity of government intervention. According to them, the press is currently indirectly influenced by the government through subsidies, tax cuts etc.  Hence, as complete freedom from the state is not possible, only government can “through policies and subsidies” provide a stable institutional framework to journalism.

While all the researchers have been equivocal in spotting the ill effects of commercialization on journalism, the prescription for recovery has been few and diverse. To apply these solutions in a real world model we first try to find the most “free press” in the world.

Nonprofit organization, Reporters without Borders, have been ranking 180 countries according to the independence of their media systems for more than a decade. The rankings are based on the following categories Pluralism, Media independence, Environment and self censorship, Legislative framework, Transparency, Infrastructure and Abuses faced by the institutions.

According to The Press Freedom Index ( 2015), the current world leaders in press freedom are

1.      Finland 7.52

2.     Norway  7.75

3.     Denmark  8.24

4.     Nether land 9.22

While United States ranked 49 in the index, India ranked 136. Articles on the internet show people’s disappointment on the plummet of US rankings, terming it as “not living up to the First Amendment” (yahoo news, 2014). But an interesting question arises; can the media structure of Finland provide us with a clue as to attain a balanced, free media?

A case study of the Finnish media shows that the Scandinavian nation has a very high readership rate. Around 76% of people over 10 year age read the newspaper ( European Center of Journalism, 2013). Thus, can a big press market assure incentive for freedom of Press? Maybe not always, as proven by the fact that India is the country with the largest number of newspapers, yet it is ranked number 136. But the percentage of informed population and readership rate of news may influence people to demand unbiased content.

Finland also has a strong union to pitch for reporter’s rights. The ‘Union of Journalists’ has over 15,500 active members (pressfreedomnow.org, 2014). The Council for Mass Media, Finland helps self regulate media content, hence minimizing government influence. Thus can having a strong journalistic union encourage press freedom?

Also, according to Jyrkiainen, “the structure of Finnish newspaper industry is based on a few strong nationwide newspapers on a wide regional daily press, and on numerous local papers” (Jyrkiainen , 2009).  Thus, does a strong localized press structure make journalism free from bias?

Lastly, the “Finnish government has made transparency and information availability- essentially a good journalism- an institutional prerogative” (Merchant, 2013). The government is said to foster, promote and safeguard the press. This perhaps brings me back to Bagdikan when he says that large “communications cartels …(has been) made possible by the withdrawal of government intervention that once aspired to protect consumers and move towards the ideal diversity of content.” Thus, what should be the role of government in journalism?

Whether Finland can be considered as the perfect model of press freedom, or the above factors can influence the media environment in any other country, are questions that demand further research.  But in this age when the presence and the strength of the great watchdog of society, the fourth estate is under threat, it is essential for society to find an way to restore media to its former glory. “Going back is not an option, nor is desirable…. We have to move forward to a system that creates journalism far superior to that of the recent past.” (Nicholas and McChesney, 2009)

Follow @USERNAME