By Lauren Ruth Crowell
As I look around my journalism class, I see tech addicts. Anything but people who are qualified to receive or report news. A more appropriate description would be something like 'authors of woven opinions and angles'.
People love to talk, just shoot their experiences straight out of their mouths. But who is entrusted, then, to set things straight? A good journalist is someone who takes the time to fully contemplate and appreciate opposing views. Someone who likes to walk to the far side of the lot to make sure they remember every detail. Someone who takes pleasure in listening rather than just prying their way to a supposed 'truth'.
The Open University Business School (OUBS) Futures Observatory in the U.K. surveyed OUBS professionals who had graduated with an MBA about the most and least trusted people in society. A panel of alumni members was asked to give a "trust rating" to 11 groups of random people using a scale from 0 to 10. Family and friends are at the top of the trust scale. At the bottom? Politicians, journalists and sales people. Nobody seems to trust journalists completely. Only a third of their fellow newsmakers gave them a rating above 2.5.
Trust is increasingly important in the writing world due to the shocking dominance of the internet in displaying news, blogs and other public texts. With so many of us sucked in by the technology, cyberspace is quite possibly the only future of information. This convenience of information seems too tempting to overcome. But how can we trust empty faces on the internet?
The future of journalism is questionable.