Did I mention that ‘Lie Boyles (nee Emilie Oy) is blogging now? Today she mentions an item from the Committee of Concerned Journalists in which they peg as their “tool of the week” a short list of what citizens should expect from the press.
The list is a shortened version of the one I used on Portland Communique, taken from The Elements of Journalism: What Newspeople Should Know and the Public Should Expect, by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel.
What’s interesting is that Boyles apparently believe certain things should be expected from the press that aren’t to be expected from, say, publicly-funded candidates for office.
“We should expect, above all,” the writers of CCJ say, “truthfulness.” This is certainly true, of course. But we should also expect truthfulness from publicly-funded candidates, rather than accusations of a vast Sten-wing conspiracy against them, coupled with blaming their troubles on being poor, or disabled, or Christian.
“We should expect proof,” the writers of CCJ say, “that the journalists’ first loyalty is to citizens.” This is certainly true, of course. But we should also expect a loyalty to citizens from publicly-funded candidates, rather than a stubborn refusal to take responsibility for their own actions.
“We should expect journalists,” the writers of CCJ say, “to maintain independence from those they cover.” This is certainly true, of course, and much of this has to do with refraining from any conflicts of interest. But we should also expect publicly-funded candidates from engaging in conflicts of interest, such as using public funds to pay personal bills or hiring their children to spam online discussions groups at an exorbitant rate of pay.
“We have the right to expect that journalists will monitor power,” the writers of CCJ say, “and give voice to the voiceless.” This is certainly true, of course. But we should also expect publicly-funded candidates who see themselves as watchdogs to not also see themselves as above being the subject of other watchdogs.
“We have a right,” say the writers of CCJ, “to a forum for public criticism and problem solving.” This is certainly true, of course. But we should also expect publicly-funded candidates to not blame the press for their problems when what the press is doing is reporting on the problems which already exist, and which said candidate or candidates caused entirely on their own to begin with.
“We have a right,” say the writers of CCJ, “to expect news that is proportional and relevant.” This is certainly true, of course. But we should also expect publicly-funded candidates to not engage in irrelevancies, such as blaming being poor, disabled, or Christian for their problems, rather than blaming themselves for their misacquisition and misspending of public monies.
For hypocritically proclaiming what citizens should expect from the press while at the same time believing that the citizens of Portland should have not expectations of her, and for proclaiming that the press has a job to do properly as long as they don’t do it properly when she’s the one being reported upon, I proclaim ‘Lie Boyles (nee Emilie Oy) to be the Tool of the Week.