History of Journalism, Essay Example

What parallels do you find between today’s journalism environment – i.e., the advent of a new technology, the crisis in traditional newspapers – and earlier periods? What opportunities and challenges do you see for journalism today and what similar opportunities and challenges has journalism faced in the past?

There are some opportunities as well as challenges that become evident when comparing today’s journalism to the journalism of the past. To many people, today’s journalism is an unclear and ambiguous field. No one knows what is going to happen tomorrow. It is believed that jobs in today’s market of print and broadcast news are “becoming like those of football coaches”; (name of author of quote, page number) it feels like jobs are based on “winnings.” (I would explain here what this means in more detail)

Insofar as the press is committed to such forms of news because of its economic advantages, the audience tuning into this type of journalism remain uninformed regarding the significant news of the day. People prefer to follow the news through evening comedy shows instead of reading morning newspapers or watching TV network journalism. This trend suggests that in the future it will be more difficult to sell newspapers and also to maintain the audience’s attention with daily news.

In the past, I think that journalists experienced the same challenges as today’s journalists. In the early 1900s, there were newsboys who used to sell newspapers to people by shouting out news headlines and the price of the papers. Nowadays, it feels the same way as a century ago, as journalists desperate for “big” news compete with rivals to sell their stories first, whether in print media, broadcasting or simply uploading it to the Internet.

Were Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst good or bad for journalism?

I think both Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst were good for journalism. Both of them accomplished many great things and achieved many individual goals. However, although Pulitzer and Hearst were rivals, I think that the competition between them raised the overall quality of journalism to another level. In other words, today’s journalism would not be like it is without these two great men of journalism.

According to our “History of Journalism” lectures, William Randolph Hearst’s “legacy is enormous, he is the single most influential person in journalism in terms of 20^th century.” (Author, page number) As professor Fountain said, “journalism in the 20^th century consisted of imitations of Hearst’s journalism or responses to Hearst’s journalism.” (Fountain) Furthermore, Hearst’s work ethic was crucial to his success, as “Hearst worked as 100 men until he was 88 years old.” (Fountain) Hearst’s career began in 1887 when he took over The San Francisco Examiner from his father. He bought The New York Morning Journal in 1895, and introduced The Evening Journal in 1896. One of Hearst’s key innovations was that “he sensationalized journalism by the introduction of banner headlines and lavish illustration.” (Author, page number) By 1930s, Hearst had a chain of 26 newspapers including large city pacific. (I don’t’ understand what large city pacific means)

As for Joseph Pulitzer, his accomplishments were no less significant than Hearst’s: they were just different. In 1878, Pulitzer became an owner of The St. Louis Post-Dispatch and was “a rising figure on the journalistic scene.” Later, he bought The New York World, which reached its highest circulation of 250,000 copies in 1886.

In 1876, Pulitzer and his employees from The World started raising money for the Statue of Liberty. In 1886, the Statue of Liberty opened, and it became of Pulitzer’s great achievements. Pulitzer’s importance can also be understood in terms of his contributions to higher education and the establishment of the famed Pulitzer Prize: “In 1912, the Columbia School of Journalism was founded and the first Pulitzer Prizes were awarded in 1917 under the supervision of the advisory board to which he had entrusted his mandate.” (Author, page number) for example: (Smith, 22)

Take one of the following – CNN, USA Today, Fox News or the Drudge Report – and discuss what its place in journalism history classes will be 50 years from now.

In my opinion, in 50 years the Drudge Report will not have earned a more significant place and status in journalism history classes. Rather, it will remain as important as it currently is. This is because the general direction of the future of journalism suggests that there will be millions of similar “Drudge Reports.” Whereas people are always hungry for a certain kind of “Lewinsky” gossip concerning celebrities, such types of news outlets are numerous. The Drudge Report could only maintain its significance if people would still click on its webpage instead of going to the numerous other available sources.

The Drudge Report began as a “gossipy email newsletter” in 1996 and has developed into one of the most powerful political media sources in the United States. The webpage received an “estimated 3.5 billion hits in the last 12 months.” (Author, page number) The founder of the Drudge Report, Matt Drudge, carefully observes the media for various stories and reports that he publishes on the front page of his website. Usually there are direct links to news sites, although Drudge occasionally writes stories himself. Drudge was nominated as one of Time magazine’s one hundred most influential people, and still considers himself to be an original newsman whose work is far removed from the desires of journalists and advertisers.

Drudge has been described as a “threat to democracy” (Author, page number) and an “idiot with a modem”; (Author, page number) moreover as “the kind of bold, entrepreneurial, free-wheeling, information-oriented outsider we need more of in this country”, according to Camille Paglia. Hence, Mr. Drudge’s significance in the press of the United States is uncontested.

If you could work for, or with, any individual, or for any organization studied in this course, who, or what, would it be? Explain.

If I could work for any organization studied in this course, I would definitely choose CBS in the 1960s. CBS in the sixties was the first network to broadcast the Olympics. The extent of their coverage and the quality of their news team were exceptional:“13 hours of the Winter Games from Squaw Valley, California. Walter Cronkite is anchor; Jim McKay, Harry Reasoner and Dick Button are reporters. Coverage is highlighted by U.S. Olympic Hockey team winning the gold. CBS also broadcasts the summer Olympics from Rome, Italy.” Furthermore, in September 26, 1960, CBS News telecasted one of the first Kennedy and Nixon presidential debates. This was a big event that glued the audience to their television screens, helping change “politics forever.” (is this a quote from a source?) In November 25, 1960, the day after Thanksgiving, CBS’ historic documentary film “CBS Reports: Harvest of Shame” was broadcast. In the program, the host of the film, Edward R. Murrow called for changes in federal regulations in order to ease the difficulties of migrant farm workers in the program. In addition, on January 25, 1961, CBS Radio and Television Networks became the first media outlet to broadcast live the presidential news conference.

The CBS of the 1960s seem to me to represent an “era” of great journalists and events. CBS hired a number of gifted journalists, such as Edward R. Murrow, Nancy Dickerson, Walter Cronkite, Jim McKay, Arnold Palmer, Charles Collingwood and many others. CBS’ programming schedule in the sixties also offered entertaining shows such as “The Dick Van Dyke Show”, and the debut of everyone’s love, “The Lucy Show”, amongst other great programs. I just wish I could be transported back to the 1960s and be a part of the beginning of the CBS Network.