Journalists have abused unique position of power
The Journalism That Matters conference is not just a waste of time and money, it is likely to do more harm than good [“Journalism’s future is in your hands,” Opinion, Jan. 4]. This is because op-ed contributor John Hamer, the attendees and the sponsors will likely leave the conference more clueless about the problems of media, journalism and information than they were before the conference.
Print and broadcast media held exclusive power for decades, which they promptly abused, abandoning objectivity in favor of representing special interests — including their own. Ultimately, they were reduced to servants of those interests (government, business, advertisers, popular opinion, etc.).
Today, if any powerful interest wants to drag us to war, cover up the illegality or cost of that war and disdain efforts to end that war, the journalistic media readily comply. If any powerful interests want to deregulate in order to fleece consumers — maybe even wreck the entire economy — the media readily comply. Public opinion enjoys media trials, character assassinations and scary stories about the evils of some unpopular religion. This is no problem for the journalistic media.
Now if The Times is going to get serious about real news, news that is the “lifeblood of democracy,” then it should start to do things right. Start using the Internet to your benefit. Instead of carping about reliability, take advantage of the wealth of information it provides to structure informative articles on critical events of the time. Do enough analysis to fairly represent the issues. Don’t just copy wire service reports. Because you have not done this, because you have caved to the powerful, you have become irrelevant. If you must have a conference, have it about this.
— Malcolm D. McPhee, Sequim
Why journalists are needed
There is little doubt that today’s newspapers — and print media in general — need to adapt to survive in this digitized world. I think there is a broad consensus that long-term survival for our local newspaper, The Times, hinges on how it adapts to confront this survival challenge.
The answer to this question is self-evident. Simply rephrase the question “What can ‘writers’ do” for a newspaper that “computer thinking” and “generic reporting” seldom does — or cannot do? Writers can create, laugh, teach and relate to local readers.
— Ted Nelson, Seattle