Is Today's Journalist a Social Advocate or Fact Driven Reporter?

CHICAGO - "If your mother says she loves you, check it out!"  

That legendary phrase originally attributed to a crusty, no-nonsense editor at Chicago's City News Bureau, a venerable training ground for scores of young reporters, has been a long-standing staple of the journalism profession.

More than a half century ago, when that comment was first uttered, a reporter's main job was to gather all the facts and present them to the reader in a straightforward, objective fashion.

Fast forward to the present where the rise of social media and multi-culturalism not to mention polarizing politics have transformed American life and put pressures on every institution, including journalism, to champion causes like equity, diversity and inclusion.

With America still trying to come to terms with racism, discrimination and other societal ills, should today's journalist focus more on advocating for change rather than merely reporting the facts of a given story?

"The primary job of a journalist is to tell the truth and that should be the guiding principle behind all our reporting," maintains John Dempsey, retired news director at Chicago's iconic WLS-AM.

He points out that gathering facts will always be at the core of good reporting, particularly when those facts are indisputable.  

"It is a proven fact, for example, that the earth is round.  That can't be disputed," Dempsey says.

"Carrying that concept further, when the leader of one political party sprouts falsehoods that the 2020 Presidential contest was stolen, while all the facts indicate that it was by and large a fair election, the journalist is obligated to report that leader is lying," he notes.

Dempsey reiterates that in their traditional role of serving as a watchdog on government, big business and other institutions, journalists are obligated to call out wrongdoing or injustices especially when facts about those can't be denied or defended.

He cites numerous historical examples. 

"When Upton Sinclair, for instance, exposed the horrific working conditions in America's meat packing plants in his classic novel, "The Jungle," the nation demanded and got reforms because no one in good conscience supported deplorable working conditions.

Another example he pointed to was Michael Harrington's book, "The Other America," which graphically illustrated that many Americans including inner city Blacks and Appalachian whites weren't sharing in the prosperity of the 1950s.

According to Dempsey, Harrington along with people like pioneering broadcast journalist Edward R Murrow who reported on deplorable migrant conditions in his acclaimed documentary, "Harvest of Shame," helped pave the way for the far-reaching anti-poverty programs of President Lyndon B. Johnson in the 1960s.

"Harrington, Murrow and others were in effect acting as advocates for change by reporting the facts," Dempsey states.  "Again, no one could dispute or defend poverty in America and that we had to do something about it."

He observes that the challenge for journalists today is to maintain fairness when covering controversial issues like abortion or affirmative action where there are many conflicting viewpoints.

"If a journalist is passionate or wants to truly advocate for a particular cause, whether the cause is considered liberal or conservative, they might be better off seeking work at one of the many openly partisan websites, blogs, or other outlets that exist in the modern media landscape, rather than at a so-called 'mainstream media' outlet."

He adds that one advantage of today's 24/7 news cycle is the proliferation of multi-faceted sources that weren't available to reporters covering the news in the era of "three main networks."

Ernest Wiggins, professor emeritus of journalism and mass communications at the University of South Carolina who also served as a reporter and editor for the Columbia, SC Record and The State newspaper, agrees that the foundation of journalism has always been presenting the truth.  

"Society functions better with truth than without it," Wiggins maintains.  "Better decisions are made. Problems are corrected more quickly. Wrongdoers are punished more often. So, from its beginning, correcting societal wrongs has been there. I don't think that's activism but being responsible."

He points out to help ensure that news organizations reported what was true and stuck to the facts, they had to clearly set up walls between reporters and opinionists.

"In traditional newsrooms, there was a line of separation between the editorial or opinion functions and the reporting functions," he says, adding that almost all news organizations had columnists who authored personal essays and viewpoint pieces that ran in prominent spaces in the paper.

Wiggins adds that these individuals were usually veteran reporters who had proven themselves as fair and accurate journalists. 

"They became trusted voices in their communities while championing causes and highlighting what they believed were matters worth considering."

Wiggins observes that the wall that separated reporters and opinionists started to break with the emergence of social media platforms and as a result, both functions seem to have merged to feed the insatiable need for content.   

"Now reporters are not only expected to cover events, but they need to comment on them on Twitter and other platforms as well," he says.

According to Wiggins, this has created confusion for the average news consumer who now has questions about the reporter's main function. 

"The downside to all of this is pretty clear," he says. "Public confusion about newsroom objectivity and perceptions of bias might arise among parties looking for, shall we say, "fair and balanced" reporting."

Wiggins expresses concern that an unwelcome consequence could be that agents who are not so benevolent might use this distrust as fodder to undermine responsible media, cast doubt on even well-substantiated reports and encourage members of the public to discard critical information, especially when it would be advantageous to them for the public to dismiss that information.

" I think we've seen evidence of this in recent years," he states.

Wiggins fears that a breakdown in civil discourse could ensue.  

"When you have pervasive doubt and cynicism along with distrust then the public can't conduct its business," he says, pointing out that a diminution of a free and vibrant press will be a crushing blow to the principle of self-governance.

"If the people can't govern themselves, then others will govern for them," Wiggins warns.  "That's called autocracy."

To Suzanne McBride, dean of the School of Graduate Studies and a journalism professor at Columbia College Chicago, one of the nation's premier media arts colleges, the question of reporting the facts or being an advocate isn't an either or.

"Investigative reporters, for example, by their very nature report the facts in exposing wrongdoing to correct a social injustice," she maintains.

McBride, who also works as a part-time editor at the Chicago Sun-Times, believes that the growing diversity of America's newsrooms is a welcome development that is leading to more inclusive reporting.

"When I began in journalism, my colleagues were overwhelming white and male," she recalls.  "As a result, issues of concern to people of color and other marginalized groups were not getting the coverage they deserved."

According to McBride, just having more diverse voices at the table in both reporting the news and determining which issues should be covered will give greater credence to the cause of social justice.

However, she stresses that journalists still need to be focused on uncovering the truth and being clear about what is fact and what is opinion.

She agrees with Dempsey that those journalists who are enthusiastic about advocating for certain causes can write for blogs, podcasts and other outlets.

But their writing should be clearly labeled, so it’s clear to readers whether it’s fact or opinion that is being expressed.

As someone who still is actively involved in the training of the journalists of tomorrow, she emphasizes the importance of being committed to telling the truth and uncovering wrongdoing wherever it may occur.

"I am optimistic about this new generation of journalists we see at Columbia College Chicago," she says, observing that not only are they more reflective of the community in their make-up but they are not as hindered by the biases that characterized earlier generations and are willing to write about groups that historically have been marginalized.  

"Plus, they are more adept at technology and social media than we are and can utilize those platforms to be even more effective storytellers," she says.