Journalists Should Not Interfere In Hazard

Whether media comes in the form of news coverage, Facebook updates, or even a text message, the media has been transporting information globally with just the touch of a button. But what happens when media is stricken with negative news? How do they go about portraying that negative information without putting their viewers into a worldwide panic? Or is that even their job? With the Ferguson crisis that was currently happening at this point in time, the media played an important role, as they were the ones who were informing media watchers and viewers about what was happening. But many were debating whether or not the news stations did and effective job when reporting to the community about Ferguson. With headline such as, “Officer shoots unarmed teen,” and “Police Brutality at its Finest,” the media was one of the first places that people went to look for more information regarding Michael Brown. When the shooting of Michael Brown took place, news stations were one of the first ones to arrive on the scene. And from that very moment, they were there covering every step a protestor took just to make sure that the Ferguson community was kept in the

This is one topic I tend to sometimes question. Although I feel it is very important for the public to know what is going on in our country, sometimes I feel it is better not to know. For example when the press wanted to print the Pentagon Papers it was a threat to our national security. I think also, the press influences people or gives them ideas. When tragedies such as the one in Littleton, Colorado occur, it is not necessary to show live coverage of frantic people running for their lives. I don't think it was right to put that tragedy on national

some of the most important duties of journalists. Many believe that the purpose of the media is to

Not only that, but constantly churning out stories about the incident every hour until it ceases to matter to them anymore. The media do not realize the problems created by the haphazard ways of this kind of reporting. In the 1950’s, media could be said as being the polar opposite of today.

Noah Rothman agrees in his article “Taking Sides in Ferguson” when he writes “when it came to Ferguson the press had not played a neutral dispassionate role in its intensive coverage of the upheaval”. Noah’s point is that when it came to Ferguson the media did not take both sides of the story equally as they should have by interviewing both sides equally and by reporting from a neutral zone. Instead they went more toward the activist group sometimes even in the protests. One news caster even went as far as to offer help to the Michael brown family saying “you know how to get in touch with me”. In the article the news reporters are shown to be unprofessional and

But, before I get to some of those stories, I have to get to my hot take first. This one is somewhat of more importantance to me. I just want to take a few minutes to talk about the reporters and journalists who are ruining the field for everyone else.

The last few years have witnessed an unprecedented turn of events in the socio-political climate of India. These socio-political changes have brought about corresponding changes in the character of the Indian mass media system, especially in the freedom and independence of the Indian press. 25 June 1975 will go down in the history of the Indian Republic as a most infamous day and a black day when the then Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi who headed the Congress Party as its dynastic head imposed an Internal Emergency in India for reasons which had no bearing to the internal security of the country.

When it comes to how news should be presented, I agree with the way Hari Sreenivasan says the news should be presented. Instead of having information that truly does not matter and that doesn't effect everyone, such as something involving a football player, information that more greatly affects the nation as a whole ought to be shown. In fact, Sreenivasan said it himself that "if you continue to have content that is weak, you won't have informed citizenry that actually makes decisions." However, there is a solution to this that Sreenivasan offers. Instead of having the national news, or even more local news programs, focus on things involving athletes or celebrities, have other networks that relate to said person, such as ESPN, cover news

The journalist role is important because it provides the world with facts and the answers. Often times politicians or public figures may not tell the world the whole truth. But because of journalist, they take time to investigate the whole story and then provide citizens with correct news. Not only do journalist investigate the news, journalist also take time to interview these public figures and ask the questions that viewers want to ask. For example, Barbara Walters is known for her skills of asking the questions that most are scared to ask. But because she is fearless and true journalist she asks these tough questions and gets down to the nitty gritty. This is all made possible through the first amendment.

The coverage of daily news reports can shift the emotional response for countless Americans with just one broadcast eventually, putting lives at risk. The news coverage has sparked emotional outrage on several topics. For example, black lives matter since police brutality, pulse nightclub shooting, and racial profiling suspects/victims. Regulation is needed because media reporting is seriously placing lives endanger; policies that are in place now are not sufficient to punish the networks or the backlash it creates. There should be stipulations set with heavy fines for how the information is presented by bias media programs. Furthermore, a number of bills should be implemented to regulate use of media coverage on the air and introduced in to

There have been tons of tragedies over the years that were followed closely by the media. It’s already horrible that a tragedy is occurring, wouldn’t it be worse if we had no idea it was happening. There have been countless incidents of tragedies being filmed live and nobody saying it was unethical. A couple of examples include 9/11. What if they had not shown footage of it while it was happening? People would be less informed and wouldn’t realize the magnitude of the event. People had to know what was going on in real time and needed to have all the facts to ensure their safety. Another example is the Reginald Denny incident. The incident occurred when during the L.A. Riots helicopter news reporter Bob Tur showed live video of truck driver Reginald Denny being beat up on the streets and nearly killed. Because of Bob Tur broadcasting the attack a local man picked him up and drove him to the hospital. If it weren’t for the live footage of Reginald Denny being attacked he might not still be

All around the world, natural disasters are occurring. Even if some might not take more than a minute, they can cause a lot of damage. From 2000 to 2010, there has been an average of 63000 deaths per year due to earthquakes and even more that are injured. They may have survived but suffer and shouldn't be disturbed by anyone, including the press, especially if they are still standing in the debris of their own house. I believe that the press shouldn`t be able to interview victims of natural disasters on scene: asking questions about the event can trigger intense emotions, the interviews happening on scene can distract the policemen from doing their jobs and the information given to the press about

Therefore, it is necessary to treat reporters professionally. As a spokesperson, you need to showcase the organization in the best light. However, a journalist is always on the lookout for information to use. Hence, understand that because journalists are never off duty, anything that is said to them may be reported. No matter how affable the journalists, it is important that you are not negligent and to be apprehensive of this fact.

Have you ever thought “Let me leave from TV!” in your life? Do you remember the day when Japan was severely hit by the Great East Japan Earthquake on March 11, 2011? In that time, in Japan every TV programs stopped broadcast of entertainment shows, such　as TV variety shows, and then they had only the news about the Great East Japan Earthquake for a while. It happened not only after the disaster but also, after the 9/11 attacks; after a disaster, the media tends to have extensive coverage that is focus on almost just a disaster. (Houston, Pfefferbaum, & Reyes, 2008) I have recognized how grin the disaster was, but the extensive coverage was so disgusting for me, and it made the feeling “Let me leave from TV, I do not want to receive further information!” Based on this experience, I took on an opinion that media should take a hard look at how media should be after a disaster because too much coverage that focus on a current impact disaster after a disaster adversely effects on relay transferring information, and mental health, economy.

a. Impact: How many people does the event affect? How seriously does it affect them? - Here, the news writer or the reporter has to think about the importance of the news to the audiences. They will have to think about the acceptance of audio, what they want to know and to be informed. Like- When there is a devastating Rain fall in our country; the mass people wouldn’t be interested to know what is happening or what day is being stop in the country.