A post on how the public views the craft of reportage, this time in response to the venerable Jack Cahill. He was saying how he's never had to wipe spit off his face after telling someone he was a journalist (OK, my words, not his). My point was that people like journos. What they don't like is The Media.

I agree with much of what Jack says below. The only negative reaction I've ever had personally when I've told people I'm a journalist has been from politicians, and they were kidding (I think).

But I also think there's a difference between how people see individual journalists and how they see The Media (ooh, scary beast!).

I also think when it comes to asking people about their trust and credibility of the media, one must ask them if they trust any particular outlet/journalist more than another, and then find out -- either directly or indirectly, or perhaps both -- whether that assignment of credibility is due to the fact that the outlet/journalist confirms the person's worldview.

The world is becoming more splintered. The "credibility" problem might just be, at least in part, a reflection of that.

Rick Salutin wrote a column in the Globe some time ago (damn, I wish I could find it!) on one philosopher's argument that people seek out news that conforms to their views, which Salutin saw as a bracing alternative to Chomsky's critique.

From my reading of Canadian journalism history, some of our craft's heavy hitters in the 1960s and earlier used to help cabinet ministers and prime ministers write speeches one day and then go out and report on them the next.

But the public didn't know about that back then, did they?

I wonder to what extent credibility problems stem in part from a more informed and media-savvy public. However, even if we account for that, there are still many ways the industry is hurting itself.

Bill Doskoch
On vacationhttp://billdoskoch.blogware.com

PS to David Akin: If it's the Ross Howard I'm thinking of, he could be a former Globe and Mail journalist who once graced the parliamentary bureau

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 14:14:48 -0500, Jack Cahill <2jackcahill@rogers.com> wrote:
> The discussion about the alleged disrespect and declining influence of journalists has been interesting and worthwhile, but much too negative.
> I'm an old guy now but I spent more than 45 years in the business, struggling all the time to remain a reporter and writer because that's where the importance and fun was. Now, in my retirement people don't shun me or spit at me when I pass by. On the contrary they tell me they envy me for having had such an interesting life. Some even claim to remember some of my articles or books and say they they admired my work.
> Just now, before I started writing this I said goodbye at the door to an electrician who had installed a new fan in the kitchen.
> He said: "Your wife told me you were a journalist. That must have been interesting. I envy you."
> Then he went on to discuss George Bush and the American election at enormous length.
> He didn't say: "I want to get the hell out of here. I don't want have anything to do with a crummy journalist." Exactly the opposite.
>
> And, as Tony Westell says, Canadian journalism has improved greatly since he and I started here in the late 1950s. Westell did an apprenticship as a reporter in Britain before he arrived in Canada and I did a cadetship in Australia. But in Canada there was no training at all. Journalists just happened. And despite this there were some very good ones. Gee, now we have journalism schools.
> In those days we had to write in cablese ("Upstick job arcewards) to save pennies on the penny a word press rate. I had a colleague who filed a story from New Guinea by carrier pigeon. Now communication, the main part of our business, is instantaneous and cheap.
> We've improved. We still have a way to go and the profs are pointing a way, though dismally. I would hope they still manage to teach their lucky students that journalism is a good, honourable and interesting game to be in. It was for me.
> Jack Cahill

I filed a later post in response to an observation by Anthony Westell:

The period I was thinking predates Mr. Westell's arrival in Ottawa -- and 
certainly, I never came across anything associating his name with such 
practices.

But alas, I'm on holidays and can't provide a specific reference right now.

Bill Doskoch
On vacation

http://billdoskoch.blogware.com

> From: "Anthony Westell" <awestell@sympatico.ca>
> Date: 2004/12/17 Fri PM 04:38:00 EST
> To: "CAJ-list" <caj-list@eagle.ca>
> Subject: Re:Slamming Miller
> 
> Bill Doskoch writes: "From my reading of Canadian journalism history, some of 
our craft's
> heavy hitters in the 1960s and earlier used to help cabinet ministers and 
prime ministers write speeches one day and then go out and report on them the 
next." 
> I was in the Ottawa Gallery from 1964 onwards and never heard of that 
happening, but maybe I was naive -- Tony Westell