Journalists not writers?

[DannMcGrew]

Twice this week I've seen posts in which journalists were discussed as not "writers". I take umbrage. Discuss.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Well that is just silly. Of course anyone who composes words to express thoughts or stories is a writer.

 

[tegeus-Cromis]

Twice this week I've seen posts in which journalists were discussed as not "writers". I take umbrage. Discuss.

Not posts by me! As you well know.

 

[J Riff]

Their editors have a lot more leverage is all.

 

[tegeus-Cromis]

Their editors have a lot more leverage is all.

I don't know about that... There are bestsellers (and would-be bestsellers, and many other books too) that are practically written by their editors. And many books for which the editors essentially prescribe to the authors what to write.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Some fiction editors are more collaborative than others. Mine always had very few suggestions, and once they had made them they left me to get on with implementing them in my own way. Since they made so few suggestions, I always felt that the least I could do was try my best to cooperate with them. What would have happened if I hadn't, I don't know.

Among the writers I have known over the years, the prescribing what to write seemed to come from agents rather than editors.

 

[tegeus-Cromis]

Then there's Raymond Carver and Gordon Lish: Raymond Carver: the kindest cut

 

[tegeus-Cromis]

One of my best friends is editor at a (relatively major, primarily non-fiction) publisher where the editors come up with the projects then suggest them to authors. They largely don't accept book proposals. Almost everything is originated in-house.

 

[.matthew.]

Journalists are supposed to be academic writers. However, most seem to be a cross between spin doctors and con artists.

The amount of bias in 'journalism' is disgusting. I have a habit of reading articles and news from views opposing my own (I don't see the point in reading what just reinforces my point of view). Yet, the amount of deliberate misleading journalists often do is staggering. Take an example I read once, it was something about a 45% rise in whatever. The whole article was written to imply that it was 45% of the total, and yet when I read the excerpt from the research paper (which contained all the information they used) it made clear it was in fact a 45% RISE, over what was currently accepted, making it like 3% from 2% previously. Of course the article itself was what made me look for their sources, and mostly I don't bother, but you can read between the lines and see the snide little ways they push their agendas, basically twisting facts to suit their own needs.

Now not all journalism is like that, but I rarely see any that isn't.

 

[tegeus-Cromis]

@DannMcGrew , I think you have your best riposte to this notion in your other current thread. Journalists are writers who actually make money from their writing.

 

[Ashley R]

Clifford D Simak was a journalist who wrote SF.

 

[Overread]

Twice this week I've seen posts in which journalists were discussed as not "writers". I take umbrage. Discuss.

The problem with labels is when they stop being descriptive in nature and start becoming more akin to a title.

I see it in photography sites too - esp when referring to a "professional photographer". Because then its not a label, its a title. A title some aspire too; some look up too; and some are. Each of those groups wants to have the descriptive term be a title because it in some way identifies and connects with them and their sense of self worth and their sense of enjoyment/fulfilment.

So when someone of "lesser or different" skill comes along who fits the descriptive term, those who are seeing it as a title get annoyed.


A journalist and a fiction writer both write. They are both writers. They can even be both things at the same time or only one or the other. However the nature of the writing is often different and you could subdivide the term "Writer" into other subgroups to further separate the population of writers.

 

[The Big Peat]

Any print journo who isn't writing is either an impressive outsourcer or some type of magician.

 

[DannMcGrew]

@DannMcGrew , I think you have your best riposte to this notion in your other current thread. Journalists are writers who actually make money from their writing.

Often true. I did that for a couple of decades. But times are tough now.

 

[thaddeus6th]

This reminds me a bit of when I read descriptions of columnists as not being journalists (I think on the basis that they're writing views rather than news).

 

[DannMcGrew]

This reminds me a bit of when I read descriptions of columnists as not being journalists (I think on the basis that they're writing views rather than news).

A REPORTER gathers facts and information on an event of public interest and then presents them in a readable style to inform the reader and is supposed to provide objective observation

A COLUMNIST gives opinions. He or she is expected to gather accurate information, just as a reporter does, and then comment on that information. A columnist has more latitude and license than a reporter and is not constrained by the rule of impartiality that governs news writing.

Both reporters and columnists are JOURNALISTS.

The word journalism was originally applied to the reportage of current events in printed form, specifically newspapers, but with the advent of radio, television, and the Internet in the 20th century the use of the term broadened to include all printed and electronic communication dealing with current affairs. Encyclopaedia Britannica

 

[.matthew.]

the rule of impartiality that governs news writing

You'd have to check, but I think here in the UK impartiality only applies to broadcast news. There's something about how easy it is to manipulate people through television and radio, while we have more defenses up when reading.

 

[J Riff]

I've seen them kill entire stories, and forbid future publication of same, not the same thing we're talking about even.
They fire people over controversial topics. Fiction writers rarely get fired, or hired for that matter..

 

[thaddeus6th]

Matthew, you're correct, although sadly it seems broadcast news has become degraded in this regard (at least when it comes to some newsreaders sharing their boundless wisdom with us rather than just reporting facts).

Very much not a fan of British political media. They're fixated on personalities and politicians and barely scrutinise legislation, when the former come and go every few years and the latter can be with us for decades or centuries.

Edited extra bit: may've strayed too far into current events with that. Apologies if so, mods.

 

[DannMcGrew]

Could we please back away from the media criticism in this forum. For us in the US it's a painful and even frightening topic what with harsh words sometimes being followed with harsh actions.