The Elements of Journalism: What Newspeople Should Know and the Public Should Expect

I loved the book when it first came out (and excitedly touted it to others), and it has been updated for the new age of journalism. The problem is, this new age of journalism is the era of the craft's death. If every publisher in America had read this eight years ago, we might be better off ... but I suspect it wouldn't have made that big a difference. RIP Rocky Mountain News, Seattle P-I, etc.

I stumbled across this book and I am glad that I did. True journalism is an important part of America's heritage that is being challenged (and often simply ignored) by today's "media". The pace of changing technology today makes old fashioned journalism look obsolete to many, but it is actually more important than ever. How well journalism adapts to these changes will determine our country's future. The authors provide expert counsel on this complex subject in a surprisingly readable and interesting style.

For my journalism class, I had to choose a book of merit about the media. "The Elements of Journalism" doesn't disappoint. This book takes the form of an instructional guide in that its objective does tell what journalists should be doing in order to create an effective press and what the public should expect from it. I find "The Elements of Journalism" to be of great use since it outlines what every budding journalist should follow to maintain ethics, objectivity, and truth in their work. It even describes man's history with the need for communication and a briefing of journalism's role in history. The book is written with clarity and the topics flow together. I also noticed that Kovach and Rosentiel developed many "theories" of the media-which all seem true too. What will always stay with me is the "The Theory of the Interlocking Public"-that states that everyone has an interest and is an expert in something. We need to be knowledgeable about the realistic description of how people interact with the news in order to present information as accurately as possible so that an individual group is not drawn to an article but a WHOLE variety of people depending on their level of knowledge about the world. Good journalism targets each level. I always remember this while writing an article for the paper. As for what citizens should expect from the press, I admired the quote "The marketplace fails if we as citizens are passive, willing to put up with a diminishing product because we have no alternative. It works only if we act with a voice and a reason." It basically means that the purpose of a press (to convey the information that people need to be sovereign) will deteriorate if the people don't take action and speak up in what they believe in and hold true. And, I can go on and on....because this book is so full of insightful information. I recommend it for anybody interested in the workings of the media.

Did you ever give much thought to the "unbiased" nature of journalism? Or about "balanced coverage" in articles and newscasts? Well, Kovach and Rosenstiel certainly have -- and their thoughts on these concepts are nothing short of revolutionary. 1. The authors argue that by nature, journalists are biased -- and that this is ok. 2. They also claim that "balanced coverage" is unfair, and should not be a goal of journalism.Sounds crazy, right? At first blush, yes; but by clearly delineating what journalists SHOULD do, the authors make a strong argument that "bias" and "balance" are misused terms that ought to be discarded.For example, they say that requiring journalists to be unbiased is unnatural, for bias is part of human nature -- and professional journalists should not be required to forget who they are. Instead, journalists should maintain an *independence* from those they cover, so that they are not unduly influenced by people they interview -- even if they do agree with them.Likewise, they argue that "balance" should not be a tenet of journalism, because not all voices deserve equal time. The authors instead suggest keeping the news "comprehensive and proportional," so that the time allotted to various parties in an issue is proportional to their role or importance in that issue.And so, perhaps Kovach and Rosenstiel aren't so crazy, after all. In fact, the book is full of sensible arguments like these, making it a fascinating read; what I've discussed here is only the tip of the iceberg. I highly recommend it!

After researching the problems in modern journalism, Kovach and Rosenstiel got the input of journalists and others around the country on the crucial question of how to rediscover and rearticulate the essence of journalists' craft and the role of journalists in society. That is the inspiration and the subject of the book. But this is much more than a rulebook for journalists -- it also explores the critical relationship between those who cover the news and those of us who are consumers of the news. It is serious stuff. It is also exceptionally well-written, fascinating and important. For anyone concerned about the way the news is made and interested in a thoughtful critique and useful suggestions, this is the book for you. Buy it!