The Nation: How to Save Journalism

Earlier this week, an article appeared in "The Nation" titled "How to Save Journalism." In the story, the writers discuss an upcoming Federal Trade Commission hearing to address the downsizing of newsrooms nationwide and brainstorm policy measures that could end this decline. The entire article paints a dreary picture of the state of journalism - unjustly so, in my opinion.

It is obviously true that newsrooms at local newspapers and television stations have been forced to cut back in recent years. The FTC places much of the blame for these cuts on the rise of the Internet, an idea the writers of this article correctly dispel. While the Internet certainly hasn't helped most local newspapers to thrive, most of the problems they are facing began well before the Internet told hold on people.

The writers also discuss how government policies need to be enacted in order to "save" journalism. Here is where I disagree with the writers. They argue that journalism should act as the fourth estate and watch over the government. Therefore, they reason, the government should implement policies to help this estate keep watch over the other branches of government. In my opinion, however, it is not the government's responsibility to "save" journalism. It is the responsibility of journalists to adapt to our changing world and ensure that journalism never dies. Additionally, if a government agency stepped in to save, for instance, a local paper, would that local paper print highly unfavorable information afterwards? Probably not, which destroys the purpose of journalism - to keep government in check.

I also had one other final question: Who says journalism is dying? Sure, traditional print media may be declining, but online, independent journalism is thriving. The world needs journalism and it will never die out; it will evolve and change, which is what independent journalism has done when compared against the traditional media.