Physics teaches us that bubbles are spherical because that is the lowest energy state. Whether this applies to the shape and energy of journalists, I will leave you to decide. Also whether bubbles – in terms of being blown, floating along, being popped at any time – relates to newspapers in our current climate, we can discuss over lunch.
Is journalistic life a free floating immoral bubble or is there such a thing as ”˜moral journalism’, which is grounded in gravitas? ”˜Moral journalism’ is not, I believe, an oxymoron like ”˜healthy tan’ or ”˜Sun reader’ (perhaps that is unfair…) or even, remembering the 1980s software, ”˜Microsoft Works’. I am using the phrase not so much about articles of scandal, or unethical ways of gathering news (though the latter is newsworthy itself at the moment concerning phone hacking): I am concerned with weighty, profound writing which draws on a hinterland of accumulated moral thinking.
This is the journalism to be encouraged…
What does this article actually say? Anything?
I must be missing something!
#1 MichaelA
It may be that as an Australian you prefer and can digest huge chunks of red meat for breakfast, but most of us get by on a bowl of cereal. This may be a lighter and indeed more humorous repast than you are used to, but nevertheless I read it as saying much to a difficult audience with whom the concept of professional ‘morality’ many of them find challenging.
Seems to me that +Graham enters and takes on Grub Street and makes a case for moral journalism for their consideration, reviewing the historical movement for it, and commending its sources for further reading. He appeals to the role of journalists as the ‘fourth estate’ and a part of our constitution. On top of that he offers the Christian ideal of moral journalism, as well as a Christian journalist’s [and preacher’s] prayer:
Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart,
be acceptable to you,
O Lord, my rock and my redeemer.
It was probably correctly pitched for his audience and when delivered orally, both lightly engaging and yet profound enough to have given the journalists food for thought, and leaves them with a question of what their response will be.
PM,
I wasn’t after “red meat” (whatever that may mean!). I just found it difficult to see what he was trying to get across to his audience, that was all.
I don’t bring any great expectations to this issue, after all, “moral journalism” could have a very broad meaning, which is fair enough. But after re-reading the sermon, I really don’t know what +Kings means by it and everything seems to be jumbled together in a peculiar manner. Anyway, its no big deal…
#3 MichaelA
Thanks – I was being rather too clever for myself, but reading this earlier this morning here and drawing an analogy between you perhaps having a grilled meat breakfast, compared with a light breakfast and trying to draw an analogy with a thunderous full blooded sermon and a rather lighter and more humorous piece which this is. I suspect +Graham Kings pitched this to the particular audience of seasoned and cynical hacks who attended, not to lay out a complete theology, but to get them asking questions themselves, and of themselves. That anyway is what I took away from it when I read it, and a good and versatile biblical verse, which perhaps all of us engaged in any sort of communication should bear in mind.
I also think that the danger of written speeches is that one misses the non-verbal communication, and I suspect in this case, the jocularity and banter with the audience which went on.
But as you say, it would be interesting to see some of the themes fleshed out a bit more academically. That could well be a huge subject, and would take in some of the press trials of the last century in the UK as well as the history of official censorship in the UK which was only really got rid of within my lifetime. Now of course with the internet, the cat is out of the bag, and will not easily be coaxed back in. But that freedom has also brought an enormous responsibility, and there is certainly a considerable tension between ‘moral journalism’ and the pressure to deliver stories to sell news. We currently have some trials going on about the overzealous activities of some of our journalists who, it is alleged, have been hacking into celebrities’ voicemail messages and email accounts including those of members of the royal family.