挑战新闻客观性:有色人种记者如何呼吁清算

Thomas R. Schmidt
{"title":"挑战新闻客观性:有色人种记者如何呼吁清算","authors":"Thomas R. Schmidt","doi":"10.1177/14648849231160997","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study explores how journalists in the United States advocated for a stronger affirmation of social justice in journalism following the murder of George Floyd in 2020. Analyzing the metajournalistic discourse in trade publications ( Niemanlab, Columbia Journalism Review, Poynter) and on the web, this study traces how journalists and commentators challenged the professional norm of journalistic objectivity. In particular, it examines how journalistic objectivity became identified as a problematic concept, what journalists were suggesting as its alternative, and how the journalistic establishment responded. This study identifies three dimensions of criticisms and connects these to disagreements within specific modalities of journalistic objectivity (procedural, ethical, ideological). Ultimately, this analysis locates an ideological struggle in which fundamental moral norms of journalism are not only being vigorously contested but also rearticulated and renegotiated.","PeriodicalId":74027,"journal":{"name":"Journalism (London, England)","volume":"57 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Challenging journalistic objectivity: How journalists of color call for a reckoning\",\"authors\":\"Thomas R. Schmidt\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14648849231160997\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study explores how journalists in the United States advocated for a stronger affirmation of social justice in journalism following the murder of George Floyd in 2020. Analyzing the metajournalistic discourse in trade publications ( Niemanlab, Columbia Journalism Review, Poynter) and on the web, this study traces how journalists and commentators challenged the professional norm of journalistic objectivity. In particular, it examines how journalistic objectivity became identified as a problematic concept, what journalists were suggesting as its alternative, and how the journalistic establishment responded. This study identifies three dimensions of criticisms and connects these to disagreements within specific modalities of journalistic objectivity (procedural, ethical, ideological). Ultimately, this analysis locates an ideological struggle in which fundamental moral norms of journalism are not only being vigorously contested but also rearticulated and renegotiated.\",\"PeriodicalId\":74027,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journalism (London, England)\",\"volume\":\"57 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journalism (London, England)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849231160997\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journalism (London, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849231160997","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

本研究探讨了在2020年乔治·弗洛伊德(George Floyd)被谋杀后,美国记者如何在新闻业倡导更强有力的社会正义。通过分析行业出版物(Niemanlab, Columbia Journalism Review, Poynter)和网络上的元新闻话语,本研究追踪了记者和评论员如何挑战新闻客观性的专业规范。特别是,它探讨了新闻客观性是如何被认定为一个有问题的概念,记者们建议什么作为它的替代方案,以及新闻机构如何回应。本研究确定了批评的三个维度,并将这些维度与新闻客观性的特定模式(程序、道德、意识形态)中的分歧联系起来。最终,这一分析定位于一场意识形态斗争,在这场斗争中,新闻的基本道德规范不仅受到激烈的争论,而且还被重新表述和重新谈判。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Challenging journalistic objectivity: How journalists of color call for a reckoning
This study explores how journalists in the United States advocated for a stronger affirmation of social justice in journalism following the murder of George Floyd in 2020. Analyzing the metajournalistic discourse in trade publications ( Niemanlab, Columbia Journalism Review, Poynter) and on the web, this study traces how journalists and commentators challenged the professional norm of journalistic objectivity. In particular, it examines how journalistic objectivity became identified as a problematic concept, what journalists were suggesting as its alternative, and how the journalistic establishment responded. This study identifies three dimensions of criticisms and connects these to disagreements within specific modalities of journalistic objectivity (procedural, ethical, ideological). Ultimately, this analysis locates an ideological struggle in which fundamental moral norms of journalism are not only being vigorously contested but also rearticulated and renegotiated.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Shifting the protest paradigm? Legitimizing and humanizing protest coverage lead to more positive attitudes toward protest, mixed results on news credibility “Remember that?” A temporal perspective on how audiences make sense of the news China’s metaphorically “othered” image in The New York Times (1949-2020) Prehistory of journalism studies: Discovering the Brazilian tradition The digital turn from a newsroom perspective – How German journalists from different generations reflect on the digitalization of journalism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1