Credit: Anthony Mattox/Flickr/Creative Commons License

Journalism is not in crisis. The media industry — and journalists — might be, but the journalism itself is actually improving.

Such is the argument made by international documentary filmmaker Bregtje van der Haak and Annenberg professors Michael Parks and Manuel Castells in a recently published article about “Networked Journalism.”

As the authors see it, the problem is that most of the doomsayers mix the concept of journalism with the business of journalism. In their article, journalism is defined as the “production of reliable information and analysis needed for the adequate performance of a democratic society.” Not mentioned in the definition are “profits,” “professional journalists” or “traditional publishers.” Just the pursuit of reliable information.

When the authors discussed their paper at Annenberg last week, Castells started by saying, “This is the beginning of the golden age of journalism.” People have greater selection and better access to information than ever before to help make democracies perform better. Or to make democracy happen in the first place, as we’ve seen in several “Twitter revolutions” in recent years.

But the golden age comes with a few caveats for traditional journalists. “Journalist” is no longer defined by background, schooling, and salary, but by the contribution to the expanding body of reliable information about the world.

Making that contribution is getting harder. Van der Haak predicted that “robots will produce most of the basic stories we see in newspapers today.” And the more developed automated journalism becomes, the more journalists will have to specialize in interpretation, analysis and storytelling. Mere transmitting of information doesn’t count as a meaningful contribution, since anyone with a cell phone and a Twitter account can do it.

This is where the power of networking comes in. In networked journalism, journalists are not working alone at their desks but instead act as nodes of the network, adding value instead of competing against each other. Journalists collect different feeds from various sources and create a meaningful version of the story, contributing to the body of information already available. With  networked journalism, they can optimize resources and generate synergy, and new creativity will emerge from our sharing. It is very similar to any other industry in a networked society.

This will mean growing pains for journalists. In a networked system, “pointing all the microphones at the same time at the same person” doesn’t make sense, as van der Haak noted. Instead of sending all the reporters to City Hall to listen to the mayor’s speech, a news organization might serve readers better by fact-checking the speech in real time at the office.

Michael Parks noted that journalism is evolving far more rapidly than journalists are. The most sought-after skills in journalism will be analytical capacity and the ability to network. This is what the authors call “sense-making,” or professional processing and understanding of information.

And this is where the authors hit their most controversial point. They argue that “not objectivity, but transparency and independence are vital for journalism to be credible in the 21st century.” People have multiple sources of information and they are more aware about how all of the sources serve some sort of interest. It might be political, as it is in partisan media, or financial, as it is in traditional, for-profit publishing.

In this environment, the authors write, “journalism with a clear perspective is more convincing than neutral narrative, and there is increasing value placed on the voice or vision embedded in the story — that is, on a point of view. This, however, calls for analysis grounded in reporting, not opinion or ideology.”

And this, according to the authors, will distinguish the journalism from the “informed bewilderment” that the world has become. Networked journalism is not a threat to quality or to the independence of professional journalists but rather a liberation from corporate control. But it requires a massive shift in the minds of professional journalists, who are taught to determine the value of journalism by which organization produces it, instead of measuring its value to the vast body of information we already have on the Internet.

So next time you read that “journalism is in crisis” and start getting depressed about the state of the media and our democracy, make sure the author is actually referring to journalism — not the industry or the profession of journalists, but the actual “journalism.” Because while journalists may have their work cut out for them, journalism itself is thriving.

There thre basic responsibilities of any journalist. They are social, legal and professional.

Social Responsibiliy:- Press reflects the social images or pictures of our society.The whole activities of the press imparts many events of our society with a view to present them later on, in decent manner to the society people. The intention behind such approachs and activities, is to make the society people to well-informed as well as well-aware of round about happenings.So,every presentation of any journalist should be fair, balnce, truthful,inspiring and meeting the needs of common. A journalist can highlight so many unsolved areas of the society by seeking solution for the same through the activity of journalism and must not overlook or avoid this great part of responsibility towards the society.The presentation of journalist should, initiate an environment of understanding within the society and continue the same in sustained manner to uphold it satisfactorily.Development of any society mostly depending upon the imparting of creative and objectful journalistic activities.

Legal Responsibilty:- While working as a journalist, one should be well conversant with all legal clutches those may generate complicacy or bring trouble any way. For this reason, a journalist must not intervene or inflict to someone’s privacy or confidential matter until it is required to be brought to the notice of public. Any libelous or defamatory presentation taking with someone, any organization or group, is not permittable and should strictlybe avoided by the journalist. Libellous and defamatory writings or pictures, may instantly resound or repark among the public with larger acceptance, but it is not pertinent as well as not complying with the standard of professionalism.

Professional Responsibility:- A journalist should have sincerity and commitment towards its profession. The news ofany event that is going to be published for the audience, should be delineated very clearly and faiely. A very good homework in this regard for every event, should be done by the journalist with a view to present to the audience confidently and satisfactorily.. The presentation must be truthful and unbiased above all and shall never bring any embarrassment or complicacy to the organization anyway in future. The objective of any journalist is to disseminate the correct and fair report in undistorted manner, to the audience rather than crowding them intentially or allegedly to meet the present challenging situation.in the news world.. A news report should be created with greater care and responsibility as to maintain its degree of standard at higher level by avoiding anykinds of inclusion of undesireable and provocative part or portion.A journalist definitely,would require a high degree of professionalism in presenting any performances to the audience on behalf of any organization, and could be achieved so. by dint of die-hard efforts and searchin abilty, and being respectful to the works ,understanding with the surroundings and accountability towards the society as well. A journalist must follow the newspaper editor’s deadlines.