No matter who you are, where you are, or what you’re doing, one detail remains sempiternally true: The first semester of college is stressful. Values, work ethic, and even individual penchants are challenged by the labile nature of attending a university. When Allie Yazel and I discussed our beliefs of what journalism is and whom we hope to work for, our reveries flourished in our wide, dilated eyes. I believe my dreams didn’t change, but evolved. I went into our class believing that the definition of journalism is to bring light to the issues that are still in the dark. I still have this belief, but I understand the difficulty in it and thus appreciate it even more. Talking about controversial issues like terrorism or politics or the latest big-news murder trial, using credible and factual sources, maintaining an objective voice and still being sensitive to your audience, is pretty damn hard.
Andrew Jarecki’s poignant documentary Capturing the Friedmans informs its audience of the situation pertaining to their (the Friedmans) family: sodomy. And Jarecki does just that. Inform. The truth of the situation is still unclear and although Jarecki believes, with the information he has collected through the filming process he knows what is true, he still provides no personal opinion. No subjectivity, no “spinning” of the situation(s), nothing. Some critics were outraged. Some enthralled. I’m also enthralled; journalism is founded on objectivity. Jarecki holds the same philosophy that we frequently discuss in class: Keep your opinion out. He proved to me that Journalism Is Not About You. As reporters – writers or broadcasters or documentarians – we accept the common belief that we are presenting the facts. Seems easy enough, right? I didn’t realize how hard it is to not voice you opinion on something until I took this class. As humans, we want to voice our opinions. As teenagers, we have to. It’s difficult to humble yourself, but when done successfully – like in Capturing the Friedmans – it’s beautiful.
Similar to Jarecki, Ryan Lizza’s article, featured in the New Yorker, How Chicago Politics Shaped Barack Obama is equally objective. A commentary cannot be successful (in my opinion, at least) if it’s not simply stating the truth. Weaving out your own personal opinion while still being an interesting and exciting and awesome writer is a skill that’s quite hard to master. Frankly, stating data’s easy. But being apart of The New York Times or The Chicago Tribune requires sheer talent in all aspects of writing, not merely displaying the facts effectively. Lizza proves that journalism’s also about understanding. Nothing’s really quite as it seems and it’s our duty to uncover what’s indeed genuine; a person can change—like Obama—and it’s not necessarily a bad thing. We need to understand that our president and celebrities and criminals are only human and that it’s not our job to judge, but to inform. When presenting scandalous material, of course it’s hard to not interpret what you’re reading in your own cynical – or optimistic, what have you – viewpoint and perspectives. Lizza (and Jarecki) made my opinion of journalism stronger because everything has meaning, no matter what it is, and we have to present it factually and equally and that’s difficult. I think they were both pretty successful.
While it’s important to understand concepts of journalism – like objectivity and intention – that doesn’t necessarily prepare us for what to do before we can apply these statutes. Interviewing Ellen Carpenter was absolutely terrifying; I can’t read in our textbook or watch a documentary on not only “How to Not Make A Fool Out of Yourself When Talking to A Source” but someone who also happens to be an inspirational, powerful woman with the exact job you hope to have. Of course, interviewing and formulating questions to ask a potential source is a key aspect in journalism and thus indefinitely necessary to our class, but my first time doing it could’ve been with a cat versus my hero. As the deputy editor of Nylon Magazine and previously working for both Rolling Stone and Spin Magazine, I was expecting Ellen to be a viciously intimidating, brilliant journalist. While the latter is true, I couldn’t of been more wrong with the former. She indisputably changed my opinion on journalism. I’ve always known writing is what I wanted to do, and since I was a little girl I was told journalism is a dying field. I won’t find work. I’ll work in McDonald’s – my uncle actually said that this past Thanksgiving. Yet Ellen inspired me to do what I want to do because journalism isn’t a dying field, it’s a changing field. And that’s a world of a difference. The fact that she’s also the sweetest, coolest mom I’ve ever had the chance to talk about Elliott Smith and fashion with also made me confident that journalism isn’t the intense, cutthroat world that we’re all so convinced it is. I mean, of course it is, but exciting-scary, not an I’m-actually-terrified-scary. I only learned this through talking with Ellen. When you’re on the outside looking in as a student studying to be apart of this said scary world, it seems like the claws are constantly out. But when you actually talk to someone apart of and thriving in this world, you understand the difference.
Journalism is a tree with an infinite amount of branches. Suppose you’re a kid again, climbing this huge and beautiful tree in the middle of fall. The only way you can get to the top of the tree is to touch every branch on it. You’re probably thinking, “Why the hell would I do this? I just want to climb a tree!” Yet I believe (in this extremely stretched metaphor) that you have to. You have to use every branch in order to be successful in your endeavors; you have to get your hands sticky with sap and stumble over the wobbly branches. You need to touch on law and morals and previous situations and ethics in your journalistic writings, or else you’ll never be both true to yourself and to the integrity of journalism. What kid doesn’t want to tell their friends, “Yeah, I touched every single branch on that tree, no big deal”? Being able to include every aspect of journalism in an article or cover story is the same concept: a huge triumph.
Now, what the leaves on a tree represent… Don’t even get me started on that allegory.
