In journalism, as in politics, other people's lives are a currency to be bartered on behalf of notoriety and influence.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
A journalist enjoys a privileged position. In exchange for not being able to participate in the rough-and-tumble issues of a community, we are given license to observe it all, based on the understanding that we'll tell everyone what happens fairly and squarely. That's harder than it sounds.
At times, some journalists see nothing in the people apart from an opportunity to make material gain. They see them as consumers to whom we sell commodities at huge profits that keep our bank accounts growing.
Journalism is a kind of profession, or craft, or racket, for people who never wanted to grow up and go out into the real world.
A key purpose of journalism is to provide an adversarial check on those who wield the greatest power by shining a light on what they do in the dark, and informing the public about those acts.
The money in politics is a cash cow for the media.
Think of it: television producers joining with newspapers to tell stories. It's journalism of the future. Advertising will follow the crowd - the 'crowd' being viewers and readers, of course, which could bring revenue back into journalism.
If you're a good journalist, what you do is live a lot of things vicariously, and report them for other people who want to live vicariously.
I think it is valuable and should be valued by its consumers. Charging for content forces discipline on journalists: they must produce things that people actually value.
Speaking generally, people who are drawn to journalism are interested in what happens from the ground up less than they are from the top down.
In essence, I see the value of journalism as resting in a twofold mission: informing the public of accurate and vital information, and its unique ability to provide a truly adversarial check on those in power.