Lessons from J School

“I’ll call you. I promise.”

Although those infamous words are generally linked to stories about someone, usually a guy, failing to call a date as promised, to me those words have a different meaning. After my experience as a journalism major in college, the words “I’ll call you I promise” are a reminder of having to pursue relentlessly sources who broke promises to call back.

In journalism school students are often taught one of the best ways to land a job after graduation is to seize as many internship opportunities as possible. But even for those like myself who did not plan to go into journalism and didn’t care about having plum internships, we got our heavy dose of “living in the reporter’s shoes” through assignments from teachers and college newspaper editors. We had to write numerous stories, which inevitably involved having to seek out sources.

I quickly found the source-gathering process is the best and worst thing about journalism. On the one hand, through interviewing you meet intriguing people who are accommodating and helpful.

On the other hand, you meet people who want to make reporting more difficult than it has to be. There is something about being interviewed that often makes people feel suspicious and paranoid. It’s a distrust that often transcends race, religion, color, creed or background. It’s also the dichotomy of the public’s relationship with the press; although people read the newspaper, watch the news and listen to it on the radio, they are often unwilling to help the news media they patronize (whether they’re willing to call it “patronization” or not).

There are a number of theories that may explain the public’s behavior toward journalists. One is the perception that the journalist’s motive is always to shed false light on someone for personal gain. I have seen this theory manifest numerous times.

As a college senior I covered debates hosted by student organizations. After one of them, I asked a group’s president for an interview. However, she told me her answers would come with a condition.

“I learned in a class once that journalists try to make people sound bad by putting their comments word-for-word in stories, so you’re not supposed to do an interview unless they promise to clean up your quotes,” she said matter-of-factly.

I couldn’t believe what I was hearing; at the time, her response was a first. Using my inside voice, I calmly replied,

“Actually, it’s not very journalistic for me to clean up quotes, so I’ll just ask someone else.” As a turned to leave, she stopped me with a shout. Gaining a newfound confidence in my ability to portray her fairly, she said,

“Uhh-no, that’s okay; I’ll do the interview…I trust your judgment.”

It’s amazing how many opinions would change in about thirty seconds.

Then there were others who fall under the “I’ll call you I promise category.” These are the folks who agree to an interview, but during it get asked a question they can’t immediately answer. They promise to get back to you promptly with an answer, but never end up doing so without a little hounding. By the time you finish grilling them, they’re wishing you had never called them in the first place.

The forgiving rationale for such behavior is that people genuinely want to help, but are just so busy they forget. The more cynical explanation is that during or after an interview, they get this epiphany that they are unnecessarily taking time out of their workload to help someone else do his or her job. Forget my promise; the reporter can find someone else, they reason. However, ‘finding someone else’ is not the ideal situation on deadline. A teacher of mine said it best: When reporting, “trust no one.”

And there were still others who decide to be interviewed, but are extremely difficult about the terms of their service. They ask to preview all questions, which must be typed in Times New Roman, 10-point font, one-inch margins. They also request a faxed copy of the article “before it goes to print”-even if it’s just a homework assignment.

Although I don’t plan to be a journalist per se—I’m more interested in using my journalism skills in law and other fields-- I have an appreciation for the amount of tolerance and hard work it takes to be in the profession. People wonder why journalists can be pushy when trying to get an interview. I now understand that it’s because they have the important job of informing the public about what goes on in their communities and beyond, but the public doesn’t always see the importance of aiding them in the process. The situation in Iraq illustrates the fact that the news media have an invaluable role, and cooperation from the public would be much appreciated.

Granted, journalists don’t always use the best tactics to obtain information or report on everything “objectively”, especially regarding racial issues. Blacks are most often shown in evening news mug shots, but not interviewed as experts, which clearly needs to change. Two major parts of the problem are the lack of minority representation in news, especially in key locations such as the Washington Press Corps (reporters who cover the White House), and, within the profession, the general lack of understanding of how to train journalists, who are mostly white and middle class, how to be sensitive to racial and cultural issues (although I argue everyone needs some form of diversity training, but some need more than others). Unity Journalists of Color, which includes National Associations for Black, Hispanic, Native American and Asian Journalists, are working to correct these problems. Also, news organizations such as Knight Ridder, one of the most diverse with a “Diversity. No excuses” motto, and, ironically, Fox News, are making serious efforts to diversify news media. However, more profession-wide efforts are needed.

But journalism’s shortcomings do not completely explain the way journalists are treated. I have interviewed plenty of people my own race who have displayed the same attitude toward journalists as people of other races. People of all backgrounds are also quick to make usually unsupported statements such as “the media doesn’t know the power they have” and “the media doesn’t care about people.” Actually, most people who go into journalism don’t do so for selfish reasons—they do it for the love of the pen and telling others’ stories. And, as a result of being journalists, they actually do become more racially and culturally sensitive (also confused with being “loose and liberal”). I would dare say that, for the most part, journalists deserve much more credit than they receive.

What can you take from my comments? Don’t be so quick to label journalists as “unfair.” Know that although they aren’t perfect, you shouldn’t always assume the worst in reporters. Also, don’t look at the media as one large, unified group. Media, after all, is plural for medium; it’s media are, not media is (which also invalidates comments such as the “media doesn’t”). There are sports journalists, entertainment journalists, and hard news reporters (e.g. CNN, Washington Post, Newsweek). Not everyone has the same goal—some forms of journalism are clearly more noble than others. As a journalism student trained in hard news reporting, I’m partial to that form of journalism, so even I have to catch myself and see beyond the negative societal stereotypes targeting reporters generally. And one more thing…

If you’re ever in a situation where you’re tempted to decline being interviewed by a journalist for no good reason, or if you utter the words “I’ll call you I promise” during an interview, think about whether it would kill you to actually do it.