Snack Time

Something struck me when I caught the phrase "info snacking" in Journalism class. Snacking on information just to get a taste of what is going on in the news. Is there anyone else out there guilty of this indulgence? I definitely am guilty! With a busy shedule and little time for outside reading, I find myself catching a few phrases of a paper in order to keep up with the "real world". I glance through and read headlines, maybe the intro and conclusion to a paper, but then I am satisfied enough to move on to other things.
Is it wrong to info snack? If I don't find myself intrigued by an article, I generally don't pay attention the entire way through. Am I really getting the news? I do what I can to get by, but even if I had the chance to sit down and read a paper entirely, I have to admit that I probably would not.
I'm sure that just as I "info snack" on the news, students info snack, or fake read, in EVERY subject. "Info snacking" is not targeted to the media source, people everywhere info snack constantly.
But if we are trying to change the info snacking of media by changing content, then how can we change the info snacking of students across the nation? What will it take to get students to critically read material? So much can be lost in catching snippets of information.
We've got the facts down, but let's get down to the art of the matter.
How is journalism being written so that it is interesting and intriguing all the way through? I highly doubt we are running out of creative writing or journalism majors, but how can they help in the process of drawing in thorough readers?
To keep the "news" in news may not be difficult if done correctly and unbiasedly. What is difficult is writing creatively about subjects which may otherwise bore us.
I think pushing writers to invent new ways of presenting truthful news will contribute to saving the media industry. When an interest sparks in an uninteresting topic, (whether that be through the way it is taught or written) we will be on our way to a satisfying "meal" of information rather than a mid-afternoon snack.

Out-of-luck

How do you direct people to the truth when your perception may be biased? The movie "Outfoxed" produced by Moveon.org frustrated me to no end. Throughout the entire movie I found myself frustrated not only at Fox News but at the producers of the movie. The media seems to have become entirely political and cut-throat: one media producer doing anything to outdo another producer. I understand that in many senses it IS a business, but where is the line drawn? What actions or words are ever "right" in the eyes of the competition? How does one go about finding the objective truth in media? As i watched the movie I was all too aware that the movie was trying to influence me just as much as Fox News. This production was no less biased than Fox News.
Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel's book The Elements of Journalism discusses (in chapter 5) independence from faction. I can see some of these ideas of "independence of mind" without "independence from neutrality". Perhaps the producers of "Outfoxed" were in the right by critiquing Fox News, afterall, I do agree with several things they had to say. However, I can't help but feel that it was more of a competitor's move- one that exposes secrets of the "dark side" without really showing who they (the producers) really were or what they stood for. I find it frustrating to see the extremes without the balance of truth in journalism.