Last Updated: August 17, 1999
Printer-friendly version
Journalistic values drive what goes on in newsrooms each day – what
issues and events newspapers cover, who journalists interview, how stories
are framed and presented.
ASNE launched the Journalism Values Institute to prompt newspapers and
journalists to reinvigorate their core values.
Thirty editors took part in the formation of the Institute. They met
three times in 1995-96, each time for three days. Newsroom staff members
joined the editors for one meeting. Concepts from these sessions were developed
into materials that were presented at four regional JVI seminars in 1996-97.
The regional seminars took place in San Francisco, Washington, D.C., Chicago
and Atlanta.
Building from "Timeless Values: Staying True to Journalistic Principle
in the Age of New Media," (a 1995 ASNE report), the original group of 30
JVI editors examined six enduring journalistic values and then defined
them in new ways. These new definitions can be summarized as:
• Balance/Fairness/Wholeness – to reflect the "wholeness" of
communities. Coverage needs to capture diverse voices and viewpoints, solutions
and problems, the profoundly ordinary as well as the unusual, the good
with the bad.
• Accuracy/Authenticity – to get the facts right but also to
get the "right facts." Coverage needs to provide background, context and
perspective and it must capture the tone, language, experiences and emotions
of people.
• Leadership – to frame and illuminate important issues in the
communities a newspaper serves. Coverage needs to stimulate discussion
about public concerns and help people see possibilities for moving forward.
• Accessibility – to connect the public to important community
issues. Coverage needs to create give-and-take between the newspaper and
its communities, and connect citizens to one another.
• Credibility – to consistently fulfill journalistic values over
time and convey a deep understanding of the communities a newspaper serves.
• Judgment – to act as the regulator of the other journalistic
values by selecting, shaping and bringing definition to what is important,
interesting and meaningful in a community.
Why journalistic values matter
The journalism values system works much like an ecosystem. At first
glance, the elements of land, air, water and wildlife seem quite simple.
As the elements interact and function together as a whole, a much more
complex and nuanced environment emerges.
Editors concluded that newsrooms must approach their values, communities
and assumptions as such an interconnected system.
The six enduring values must be simultaneously, not independently, practiced.
The values are formed by the newspaper's relationship to its communities
and by the preconceived views and assumptions that journalists bring with
them.
The journalism values system is not a gimmick or tactic. It cannot be
acted upon as a "connect-the-dots" activity. It is a lens through which
newspapers and journalists can view what it means to practice their values
on a day-to-day basis and over time.
But this lens will be of use, the JVI editors emphasized, only if newsrooms
challenge themselves. Indeed, the editors said it is essential for journalists
to talk about their values. As one editor remarked, "It will take 300,
no 3,000 conversations" in newsrooms.
Here is a sketch of how the values relate to one another.
• The newsroom franchise: Credibility
The system begins and ends with the value of credibility – a
newsroom's and newspaper's franchise.
Credibility is driven by how people view what journalists do over time.
Readers judge a newspaper's credibility by whether journalists demonstrate
a deep understanding of the community and are a reliable source of information;
act as part of the community, not just as passing visitors; and take responsibility
for how their coverage might affect people. If newspapers and journalists
lack credibility, people turn away.
But while credibility is essential to a newspaper, it is not necessarily
an action value on its own.
• Protecting the franchise: Four key values
Journalists must implement four key values to gain and preserve credibility.
These are balance, accuracy, leadership and accessibility.
These four values play off one another. For example, if a journalist
views balance as capturing only two opposite sides when there are actually
multiple dimensions to a story, then accuracy suffers and claims of bias
may result. Readers judge whether a newspaper is credible by examining
the extent to which journalists fulfill all of their journalistic values
over time.
• Making the system work: Judgment
Judgment can be thought of as the regulator of the journalism
values system. It acts as the filter through which the values of balance,
accuracy, leadership and accessibility flow and decisions are made from
them.
If journalists use their judgment to shape their values in a meaningful
way, then credibility is the outcome. But if the judgment filter is somehow
obstructed (if the newspaper does not truly understand what is important
to readers, for example, or if "official" voices exclusively drive news
coverage), then the newspaper risks losing its relevance and meaning in
people's lives. Credibility is thus undermined.
• The relationship that guides the system
Central to sustaining the values system is an independent/interdependent
relationship between newspapers and their communities. Both journalists
and citizens believe newspapers must maintain the ability to make independent
judgments without fear or favor.
In order to be credible when exercising independent judgments,
journalists must have a deep understanding and knowledge of their communities.
This requires an interdependent relationship with their communities.
Interdependent journalists can better judge what information is relevant
and meaningful to people.
• Preventing system malfunctions: Check your assumptions
Everyone has preconceived views and assumptions, or what some
people call "biases." They are people's starting points. They exist within
institutions and individuals, including journalists.
The preconceived views and assumptions of journalists can drive how
they approach coverage, the questions they ask, whom they talk to, what
they hear, how they frame stories and how news is presented.
Journalists must ask themselves, "What assumptions do I (and my newsroom)
bring to this issue? How might these preconceived views affect the way
we frame stories? How can we deal with these views?"
Biases influence journalists' news judgments and how they fulfill their
values of balance, accuracy, leadership and accessibility. In the end,
bias in a newsroom can affect the credibility of the newspaper.
Questions to gauge news coverage
Two sets of bookend questions can serve as a useful test for newspapers
and journalists as they begin to measure their work and test their values
system.
Before the story is written...
Journalists should ask themselves these questions before they cover
a story or present it in the newspaper.
1. What assumptions and preconceived views do we bring to the table
– how do these preconceived views shape our news coverage before we even
begin to frame the story?
2. What is the essence of the story – how should we frame our coverage
to capture where the issue begins, the nuances of the situation and the
meaning people are conveying?
3. How are we listening and to whom – what voices do we need to cover
to illuminate news coverage and how do we need to tap into the many dimensions
of our communities to find those voices?
4. How might we think about our coverage over time – when we think about
our coverage over time, what do our conversations within the newsroom need
to sound like and what existing perspectives, experience and knowledge
do we need to tap within the newsroom?
After the story is written…
After a story is written, journalists should ask themselves these questions
to determine whether they are fulfilling their values.
1. Does the newspaper convey a truly deep (not just broad) understanding
of our communities? Does it provide diversity of thought, people, points
of view and sources that fully reflect our communities?
2. Does the newspaper explain instead of just describe? Does it provide
context, meaning and perspective (not just facts, figures and data) that
help citizens make sense of what is going on around them?
3. Does the news coverage create wholeness (or coherence)? Does it give
people a sense of the tone of our communities, capturing the language people
use and conveying the nuance and essence of stories?
4. Does the newspaper provide clarity of complexity? Does the coverage
capture the essence of complex issues rather than provide overly detailed
and complicated coverage that may serve to confuse people?
