Blurred lines vs. transparency

By Jarrod Benn

We’re in a time period where the lines between business and journalism are being blurred in order to benefit businesses and brands.

While these businesses flourish the morals of journalism seem to be getting stepped on, many publications seem to have given up honest journalism for more of a money grab attempt.

For example, rather than presenting a wide range of positions on topics some publishing companies would add an underlying bias in order to sway the reader's opinion.

This bias can be due to many of the common faults found in today’s business models such as the lack of diversity which has hurt many brands, companies, and businesses. Adding more people into the offices of different backgrounds and cultures may help brands and businesses in the long run because the generation of today often seems to be interested in different and new things rather than the same old.

Publications can and have ended up left in the past because of their willingness to publish form a business standpoint rather than a standpoint based on integrity. In the eyes of many, journalism should be as unbiased as possible and transparent with readers, I’m sure that there are many that would appreciate honest journalism.

One of the big turning points that seemed to make it “okay” for journalism to lack integrity can be found in McChesney: Rise of Professional Journalism McChesney mentions that in the 1980’s the relaxation of media ownership led to waves of deal-making. Making a deal consists of one side benefiting the other side, deal-making, in general, is no problem but deal-making in journalism is a bit of a head scratcher for some.