Assignment 2
A journalist’s main task is not only to cover news and stories, but to addresses them to the reader and the receiver delicately, emphasizing on the term “delicate”, because trying to add the reporter’s point of view will definitely affect the way the reader receives the news or could create a sort of bias in the news. For that stated, objectivity and truth are the keys to success and safety for every journalist in the field, they should stick to the truths avoid taking sides by not adding their opinion and remaining neutrality. Objectivity was justified as a technique for creating clearer articles and independent journalists, adding the journalist’s comments is forbidden and could easily produce media bias. Objectivity also served democracy, because nothing is more important than informing the world truth information. (Ward, 2009). In my opinion, algorithmic media harm the principle of objectivity in the news. As we all know, media has revolted and transformed into algorithmic media which is a limitless list of commands performed by a device in order to evaluate a mechanism. (in McBride, 2013) (p.4). News outlets are progressively using the algorithm in the manufacturing of news to collect, coordinate, create and propagate stories. Such technology let the company create more profitable materials, on the other hand causing conflict and tension in the essentialist call of accountability and transparency (Diakopoulos, 2016). Algorithmic media differs from the legacy one by the editorial decision making which will be done in this case by the device (computer). The computer will contain codes which will evaluate the degree of relevancy and truthfulness of the news. The fact that the editor is transformed into a machine threaten the concept of media objectivity and an observed behavior is introduced to make the editorial judgment, which is often done by the relevance of the site, its authority (how many other sites links to it), and its persistence over time. In addition, the algorithmic media shows multiple points of views at the same time.
Even though algorithmic media banded the objectivity concept, legacy media was not that loyal to the field of journalism, because a lot of reporters, journalists and editors were affected by some political parties and their news was biased and subjective. The expression of opinion was always embedded in some tv stations and newspaper whether it’s in Lebanon or considered universally. Especially that Lebanon includes lots of political parties and leaders that can buy and own the media outlets to manipulate the citizen’s mind. For example, the only Lebanese Tv station that gives the audience and the Lebanese citizen objective news is “Tele Liban” which is the most news company that has the lowest percentage of followers. But everyone knows that Future Tv is biased to the future movement, Al Manar to Hezbollah etc.
However, we should minimize conflicting “use” and “trust”, since people consumed news throughout the 20th century from different media outlets that they had almost no confidence in. Some of Europe’s most popular newspapers today are media outlets at the bottom level of the trust standings. This allows us to understand why the use of social media for news can develop even with more level of trust. (Newman & Fletcher 2017). According to Newman and Fletcher in their book titled Bias, Bullshit and lies, in all regions, only 24% argue that social media seems to be doing a good job of helping them isolate facts from function compared to 40% for news media. It seems that people are relying on social media to detect the news of the country more than relying on the media news outlets. This fact shows that we are losing the sense of objectivity in the algorithmic media.
Online search engines have exceeded traditional media as the most reliable news source and the most used form is Google which is the most trusted news source, knowing that Google only offers links to outside news articles yet people appear to believe it more than the news sites themselves and that’s due to the variety of perspectives and the capability to establish our own main concern and comparing them. ( McDuling, 2015).
But to a what certain extent may social media be helpful in offering news to the people? According to Matt Carlson in his article Facebook in the news, the technology news site Gizmodo announced two articles showing how social media giant Facebook executed a squad of human keepers to manage the algorithms that chosen news for its Trending Topics section. The articles not only shed lights on the role of humans in what was supposed to be an automatic feature, but it also increased doubts about the quantity of judgment they used over the Trending Topics that appeared. Most of the interest went to claims made by an unidentified supervisor that other supervisors frequently censored traditional news. Facebook was not able to detect any cases of bias, let alone a complete slanting, but the perception of such trouble launched up dense procedures to broad censure and triggered internal consequences by Facebook to restore and defend its public status. With the evolution of social media and their occupation of news distribution practices, scholars have hypothesized as to how social media are reconfiguring journalism. The rising impact of Facebook as a spot for news distribution encourages a changing of how certain news patterns are well-fit for a brand centered on communicating rather than broadcasting. Yet, the stress on honesty and revealing that Facebook sites on its users’ conflicts with the complexity of its own algorithmic methods. (Walker, 2018). This example shows that Machin algorithm is providing biased information.
To sum up, algorithmic media have weakened principles of neutrality and impartiality in news reporting, and this can lead to endangers the role of media in maintaining a democratic sphere. Media can develop peace and social harmony, without which democracy is threatened. The media can provide opposing groups mechanisms for negotiation, representation, and voice so they can resolve their differences calmly. Unfortunately, the media have fueled the flames of disagreement by taking sides, strengthening biases, confusing the facts and selling half-truths.
The media can have a constructive part in democracy only if there is an empowering atmosphere that permits them to do so. They need the necessary abilities for the sort of in-depth coverage that a new democracy involves. There should also be procedures to make sure they are held responsible to the society and that ethical and professional guidelines are upheld. Media liberation is assured if media companies are economically feasible, free from the interference of media owners and the government, and function in a competitive atmosphere. The media should also be accessible to as wide a division of society as possible. Efforts to improve the media should be pointed toward: the security of press rights, boosting media responsibility, developing media capability and democratizing media access. (Coronel, n.d).
References:
- Diakopoulos, N. (2016). Computational journalism and the emergence of news platforms. The Routledge Companion to Digital Journalism Studies, London: Routledge, Taylor and Francis group.
- Newman, N., & Fletcher, R. (2017). Bias, bullshit, and lies: Audience perspectives on low trust in the media.
- John McDuling (2015) ‘Google is now a more trusted source of news than the websites it aggregates’ http://qz.com/329211
- Leslie Walker. (2018). Facebook trending topics: How it works. Life Wire. Retrieved from https://www.lifewire.com/facebook-trending-topics-2654603
-Carlson, M. (2018). Facebook in the news: Social media, journalism, and public responsibility following the 2016 trending topics controversy. Digital Journalism, 6(1), 4–20.
-Sheila S. Coronel. (n.d). The role of the media in deepening democracy.http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan010194.pdf.
- in McBride, K. &. (2013). the new ethics of journalism. sage, London: networked audiences
- Ward, S. J. (2009). The handbook of mass media ethics. New York and London: Routledge.
