Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 5

Young 1

Zoe Young

ENGL 1S/242A

Professor Valerie Fong

21 November 2017

Trust Versus the Media

Trustworthiness is difficult thing to define. It varies from person to person based on

personal values and condition. Generally, it is agreed that trustworthiness is determined by the

criteria of mutual respect, consistent credibility, and the allowance of room for objective

reasoning in matters of information. As our society is built on the information presented by the

media, this level of trustworthiness is imperative, at least to some degree. Furthermore, acting

like a web, each facet of the criteria can be broken down further and further until left with the

most basic of subjects. It is important to note that what the media should be and what the media

is exist in two very different spheres.

Respect in this regard is the ability to own up to mistakes, the effort to raise the audience

into a higher-level conversation, and the desire to be precise with language so as to leave no

room for wrongful interpretation. It is imperative that humble humility be exercised in any area

of trust. The media is not different. The media should be able to admit to their mistakes when

inadvertently or otherwise that they make the truth known as soon as it becomes available.

Raising the audience into the conversation is hardly difficult. By being precise with colloquial

language, even the most complex or controversial can be explored and understood by those

outside of any academic discourse group. As academic discourse groups use language that is

specific to their understanding of their field of study, it is reasonable to acknowledge the benefits

of expanding the discourse group to include those who may not have been as familiar with the
Young 2

topic. It is reasonable to understand that this method would leave room for errant and misguided

thought based on ignorant assumptions, however, like in the field of teach, this is when patience

and understanding make all the difference in the world. This is also a point where precise and

creative writing or presentation are the most beneficial as it lends to another assumption that

what the media has to say is understandable, educational, and important to the people at large.

Consistent credibility falls under the umbrella of respect as the media should care about

the credibility of its sources. It is fair to say that up until recent times, the media has performed

moderately well in this way. It is unfair to judge the media harshly for the errant nonsense

spewed by certain spokespeople on sensitive matters. It can be seen that it is far more important

for those sources to be recognized as for the non-credible people they are. For this purpose, it is a

matter of personal and national security to know about the inflammatory words of those that may

hold power so as to gage the possible reactions of others in power these persons may antagonize

stupidly.

The ethos, an appeal based on character, of those cited by the media may be highly

scrutinized as it is imperative to register the weight of a persons words based off of their

personal and/or professional views of any topic in question. As an example, the merit of a

notable psychology professor at Stanford will hold a different weight than a student of

psychology in high school if the article was about the science behind learning disabilities. The

only weight the high school student would have is if they were a part of the disability program

for a lengthy amount of time, understanding what it is like to grow up and overcome the

obstacles set in place by learning disabilities such as dyslexia or anxiety disorders. Within this

example, both participating sources have very different view as to the ins and outs of learning

disabilities, both from the professional and the first-hand account. Andrea A. Lunsford in her
Young 3

book, Everythings an Argument, further illustrates this point when she states that we tend to

accept arguments from those we trust and we trust them (whether individuals, groups, or

institutions) in good part because of their reputation. Three main elements credibility,

authority, and unselfish or clear motives add up to ethos, (42).

Building rapport is another method of gaining credibility. By putting the audience at ease,

a journalist or speaker may obtain the trust of the audience more fully. By human nature, we trust

people who make us comfortable. Lunsford states that sometimes a sense of humor can play an

important role in getting an audience to listen to or like youthe humor puts listeners at ease

and helps them identify with the speaker, (43). This method is seldom demonstrated by media

outside of the visual realm, specifically when it comes to the news.

It is believed by many that objectivity and a sense of impartiality are a good basis to trust

what is being said by the media. Specifically, if a media outlet allows the audience to form its

own opinion based on the presentation of well-rounded facts, then it is worthy of trust.

Unfortunately, it must be acknowledged that there must be allowances in this case. Brooke

Gladstone inn her book, The Influencing Machine: Brooke Gladstone on the Media, states that

journalists will bend over backward to appear balanced by offering equal time to opposing

viewpoints even when they arent equal. Often they bend to the right, to evade the charge of

liberal biasIts journalisms first giant step toward an unreachable goal because its

unprofitable to ignore your readers emotions, assumptions, and values. And it is impossible to

ignore your own, (69-98). Gladstone goes on to state that, values reflect how we believe the

world should work, while the facts are assertions about the world that can be independently

validated, (99). Objectivity, though it may seem a simple concept, is far more complex an issue

that it is easy to surmise. In this way, it is best for the media to start by figuring out how they
Young 4

really feel about the issue they cover, and leave themselves open to a healthy level of

skepticism. Gladstone finalizes her position by stating the challenges reporters face in

confronting a raft of data, confirming it, distilling it, writing it, and yet forming no opinion about

it, (110). It sounds ridiculous when put into such a perspective, yet it has a ring of truth left to

be explored as to the conundrum that is how an audience may be able to trust the position laid

out by a reporter that doesnt know, themselves, where they stand.

Throughout it all, the media is the ever-evolving monster it has been and always will be.

It behaves in much the same people do because it is run by people, flawed and all. This fact will

never change. Events will transpire that will rock the trust the audience has in the media, just as

much as it would rock the foundation of a relationship between two people; however, there can

be no trust without respect, consistent credibility, and the freedom to come to ones own

opinions.
Young 5

Work Cited

Gladstone, Brooke, et al. The Influencing Machine. W.W. Norton & Company, 2012.

Lunsford, Andrea A. Everything's an Argument with 2016 MLA Update Launchpad for

Everything's an Argument with ... Readings, 7th Ed. Six Month Access. Bedford Bks St

Martin'S, 2016.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi