There was a time in my life when I really wanted to be a journalist.
I loved the thought about being busy getting the news, reporting on it, writing about it and seeing it published. There was something really fascinating about that to me and it seemed to be the best use of my love of words. I didn’t have any particular journalist hero or whatever that inspired me to write for the newspapers. I did enjoy reading the newspapers and seeing what was reported and how it was written.
It didn’t take me long to notice the difference between tabloid and broadsheet writers. It also didn’t take me too long to detect certain bias in the newspapers. I was led to believe that certain broadcasters on television and radio in the country would not succumb to such bias because they were supposed to be impartial. Indeed they wanted to make a big deal of how their impartiality was the hallmark of their reporting and broadcasting.
A friend of mine was doing a degree in broadcast studies and had the chance to do some work experience in a news office of one of those ‘impartial’ broadcasters. It was an eye-opening experience for him. What he shared with me was how fascinating it was to see what pressures were put on making a story and also what determined the news agenda and the angle from which the pieces would be constructed. At that time I was already suspect of the claim to impartiality and my friend’s insights confirmed it.
Every day from an ever growing range of sources stories are being put together and distributed. Not just in a newspaper or a television news bulletin. It’s in an email, it’s on a blog, it’s through a video or a podcast. Likewise it’s delivered in a conversation at work, a chat when shopping, a chinwag at a coffee shop and in sombre tones whilst enduring a religious ceremony.
The stories are being dispersed. Some with facts and figures. Some with apparently authoritative insights from experts. Some lazily put together to provoke a response. Some blatantly inaccurate. All being dispersed through the atmosphere into the psyches of people.
The effect these stories have, obviously depend to a large extent on how the recipient processes it. What we don’t always have the time to do is to take a step back from the stories we receive to ask certain questions: Is that a true story? What makes it a true story? If it’s not a true story is there anything to be taken from it? If it is a true story, why am I receiving it and how am I changed as a result of it? Why does it matter?
We don’t overtly go through asking those questions, but there’s something telling about our responses and thoughts that suggest we work out answers to those questions anyway. Those responses effect our engagement with society and our views on it. Those responses can also shape relationships and our life’s pursuits.
So much all down to our engagement with the stories we hear. Could it be worth looking at the issue of if it’s a true story?
(Photo by Elijah O’Donnell on Unsplash)
For His Name’s Sake
Shalom
C. L. J. Dryden
Life With CD 