Sorry if You Suck at Media Literacy

It’s probably our fault. But there’s a way to fix it.

I ran into an old friend recently who asked me where I was going to graduate school. When I replied that I was in the CUNY Graduate school of Journalism, she stared at me with a blank expression.

“I don’t really know what you guys do,” she said, “do you like, just talk to people all the time?” Needless to say, I was a little baffled by her response. I saw her in passing so I couldn’t delve into the fact that reporting was more than just “talking to people all the time”. There’s fact-checking, making a thing, whether video, photographs, a written piece, a web page or piece of code, etc., the nuances of covering particularly difficult topics, journalism ethics and law — obviously the list goes on.

That opened up a door to a world she never quite understood. I often find myself in this predicament. People tell me that they passionately dislike the media (“but not you Kristine, you’re ‘different’) and yet have no idea how it operates. In the end, if the public doesn’t know the journalistic process, how can we expect them to engage with us, let alone trust us?

Maybe there’s another way. And it starts with breaking the rules of traditional media.

Since the birth of newspapers, journalists have stood atop their platforms and shouted the news to their audience below. Nowadays, it’s hard for the general public to understand the way the media works and how stories are covered. Media literacy is even more challenging with internet platforms and social media in the mix. While the knowledge gap perpetuates public distrust, people also want to stay informed, especially post-election. The result is the scenario above — and a confused public that will consume anything that makes them feel in the know.

Public-powered journalism flips the traditional system and allows an audience to partake in the journalistic process, from pitching to reporting. The concept is not entirely new. Jennifer Brandel first did it on Curious City, a radio show on WBEZ in Chicago. People vote from questions posed by the community then journalists investigate with feedback from their listeners. The person who asked the question is also invited to come along with the reporter while they uncover answers. Brandel has since helped newsrooms adopt a similar model with her business Hearken, which yielded positive results — journalism with meaningful engagement.

New Hampshire Public Radio’s podcast “Civics 101” is one example of this success. Civics 101 has been downloaded 400,000 times since January 25th and shortly climbed to the number 6 spot on iTunes for podcasts after its first episode. This success comes from listening to community needs and closing the knowledge gap. Rather than waiting until the very end to hear the public’s reactions, they are involved throughout the process. So the results yield more than thumbs ups or angry comments. Metrics are measured beyond page views and shares. Maybe we finally cracked the code. Meaningful engagement starts with meaningful conversations.

While public-powered journalism isn’t meant to replace breaking news or reactionary pieces, it’s another tool journalists have in their arsenal to gain greater insight to the public need. Even if born on a local level, projects like “Civics 101” have national potential. There’s room for the public to better understand the complexities of media. It’s time to break the fourth wall and start having conversations with people to differentiate solid coverage from bullshit. This is an opportunity for journalists to simply do better. While we are making strides, the struggle continues.