The Journalist Paradox

A good journalist is supposed to just record and report an event, and not be part of the action?  But in times of need, how about being part of proactive action while recording it? If a journalist remains indifferent, is this journalist really ‘good’, in the moral (instead of professional) sense of the word? Which comes first – morality or work? Or is our work to be moral?

If a journalist realises his or her own inaction prolongs or aggravates needless suffering pertaining to an event or issue, shouldn’t this very fact be recorded too, in order to be truly professional, so as to address the situation in a balanced way? Can any journalist be a truly good one without being an activist too?

Some would argue that good journalists are already activists with their pens and reports, which change the world. But are mere words and images always adequate? But enough on journalists… because most of us are not journalists (though we can be citizen journalists). The question I’m prompting here is – Do we merely observe and talk about the state of the world, or are we doing something about it?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.