What a Textbook Says News Is
A textbook for an introductory class in journalism ought to be able to define "news" in such a way that I can ask "what is news" on a test and get reasonable answers. I do not suppose there is a simple definition, but I do hope that news can be defined in a way that most journalists can apply the definition with some measure of consistency when judging situations that may demand public attention.
I have used to teach JRN270 (although I'll be using an expanded version of the same book this fall). I reviewed the previous edition for the publisher for the purpose of making the current edition better. It's fair to say that my comments about the definition of news offered on pages 3 to 5 were scathing. The reason: A college textbook should not offer students blatant tautologies for definitions. The current edition is better. But the big problem remains.
(I have yet to find a textbook with a definition of news that I like. I could do no better. I would find my own stabs at definition equally frustrating.)
Here's what the book claims: The criteria journalists use to decide what's news "can be summarized in three words: Relevance. Usefulness. Interest."
From there, we get a list of "more specific elements," including: impact, conflict, novelty, prominence, proximity, and timeliness.
From there we get examples--the stuff of "I know it when I see it." It's that .
None of this tells us what news is. These are criteria for judging newsworthiness.
The reason I'm asking the question "what is news" is because I'm wondering what role a more cogent expression of news might play in helping journalists avoid propaganda and other forms of manipulation. Or avoid other vagaries that afflict and confound the daily practice of journalism.
Tags: , ,
Posted
on
Tuesday, June 3rd, 2008 at 9:13 pm under
