CREDIBILITY IN QUESTION

April 2005
		Public trust in the news media has been shaken by several recent scandals and lapses of journalistic judgment. Two experts answer your questions about specific cases of journalistic misdemeanors and how the news organizations in general can improve their credibility. Special Report: Credibility in Question

Forum Introduction Have past administrations used pseudo-journalists, like Jeff Gannon, to help improve media coverage? Should reporters stick to reporting and leave the commentary to experts and analysts? Are journalists less aggressive than they should be with the Bush administration? Is it ethical for a working reporter to keep a blog? How do we know which writers are paid consultants and which are delivering personal or educated opinions? Did the 'real story' get lost in the fallout from the flawed 60 Minutes report on President Bush's National Guard Service? Is it ethical for media outlets to restrict what type of news they report? Are there conflicts of interest for federal employees who become reporters? Could the Fairness Doctrine become law and what impact it would have on the news? Does corporate ownership of a news provider taint coverage?	Patrick Holmes asks: All of the major networks, cable news channels, newspapers and magazines are owned by large corporations. Does the very nature of media ownership make it impossible for news organizations to be completely unbiased in covering the government and the very corporations they are a part of? What are the complications? Jay Rosen responds: Yes. The complications are to come up with another system for financing the news and information a free citizenry requires. If you have one, start a blog and tell the world about your scheme. And be sure to include the complications. Michael Getler responds: Not all of them. The New York Times and The Washington Post, for example, still are effectively in family hands. But the big conglomerates have, indeed, taken over many of the television networks and large chains dominate much of the newspaper field. This is not a great thing, in my view. It certainly doesn't make it impossible for these big corporate-owned organizations to be unbiased and to do a good job. But it does mean that for the big three TV networks, for example, they are all now run by companies and corporate CEO's whose main business is not news. Will those news organizations be aggressive when corporate interests are at stake? I don't know. So far, there haven't been many scandals along those lines but the tendency for networks to promote the films or celebrities or other interests of the parent is frequently quite obvious. Similarly, many of the big newspaper chains and companies are driven by very high profit margin commitments to shareholders, so investment in enterprising and comprehensive journalism at all levels suffers as less expensive and less experienced staffers are the norm, and there is less of a stomach for taking on special interests in local communities.