Hiastory of Journalism

History of American Journalism

In A Nutshell

America's first newspaper, Publick Occurrences, was published in Boston in 1690. Today, just over three centuries later, we have more than 1400 dailies in this country, with the two largest (USA Today and the Wall Street Journal) claiming circulations exceeding two million readers each.¹ The first newspaper promised to provide its readers with the news, "both foreign and domestic." Today we expect our newspapers to do the same, but our definition of what constitutes the news has expanded considerably over the centuries. We would now consider the religious commentary and sermons that filled many of the first American newspapers to be totally out of place—just as they would surely deem inappropriate the attention we pay to crime, scandal, sports, and entertainment in today's papers.

The newspaper is one of our most revered cultural institutions—but its history has been one of change and adaptation. Today, with the rise of the internet, we stand on the brink of another revolution in the delivery of news. The next century may bring changes to the news industry, and perhaps even to our definition of the news itself, as dramatic as those separating Publick Occurrences from USA Today.

 

Why Should I Care?

Today, more and more people are turning to the internet for the information they once sought in the newspaper. Everything from hard news to horoscopes, from political commentary to celebrity gossip, is quickly making its way from the printed page to the computer screen. It is now hard to imagine navigating our world without the internet—but just twenty years ago people could not imagine getting along without a newspaper.

So how did the newspaper become such a critical part of Americans' lives? How did it transition from a narrowly circulated organ of religious doctrine to the widely read guide to politics, crime, entertainment, and sports that it became by the late twentieth century? How did it become the primary forum in which we could find cars, vacuum cleaners, clothes, jobs, and even relationships?

What was the particular combination of forces—political, legal, technological, demographic, and economic—that contributed to the evolution of the American newspaper? And how fully will the internet now transform the newspaper and our understanding of the news itself?

 

History of American Journalism Summary & Analysis

The Big Picture: Who, What, When, Where & (Especially) Why

The American Press Tradition

Americans hold few principles more firmly than our commitment to a free press. We protect it as critical to the operation of our democratic political process, and we celebrate it as essential to the vitality of our free society.

Yet neither the full meaning of a free press nor the actual character of the press itself had fully matured at the time of the nation's founding. America's newspapers in 1776 barely resembled those of today in either form or content, and the legal understanding of the freedom owed to the press was just as poorly developed.

For example, in recent years both conservatives and liberals have argued that the "mainstream media" has lost its objectivity and become biased toward the other side. But at the time of our nation's birth, all American newspapers were highly partisan. They had no sense whatsoever that their primary responsibility ought to be simply to report the news, or to provide a balanced and objective analysis of events. They believed it was their duty to engage fully, and without apology, on one side or the other of the political disputes that surrounded them. On the legal side of the equation, the American courts, and most American political theorists, believed that "freedom of the press" meant only the freedom to publish, not the freedom from prosecution if a newspaper's content proved offensive.

The evolution of America's newspapers and the evolution of our legal understanding of their freedoms have occurred side by side. But it has not been a simple, linear process. By the middle of the nineteenth century, America's newspapers shed their partisan excess, but only by reaching out to the interests—often the vulgar interests—of the mass urban audience. They traded partisanship for sensationalism, political affiliation for the shallowness and indulgence of the tabloid. And when the newspapers of the early twentieth century finally adopted a more sober, balanced tone, they were driven as much by the demands of their business character and affiliations as by their commitments to a more responsible form of journalism.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court heard a series of cases after 1919 that helped to clarify just how free the press really was. Over time, the court's definition of press freedom broadened substantially; older laws that made it easy to punish offending publications for libel, obscenity, and even sedition gradually gave way to a more liberal understanding of press freedom. The First Amendment protections offered to journalists were still not absolute; editors and publishers still could face legal sanctions if they printed articles deemed maliciously defamatory toward individuals, flagrantly offensive to community standards of decency, or clearly dangerous to national security. Still, the trend in America's legal evolution was clearly toward a broader interpretation of freedom of the press. In the 1960s and '70s, journalists protected by the First Amendment exposed embarrassing secrets of the government's mismanagement of the Vietnam War (in the so-called "Pentagon Papers") and even brought down a president (Richard Nixon in the Watergate scandal). By the late twentieth century, the First Amendment was generally held to cover everything from the buttoned-down Wall Street Journal to the tarted-up National Enquirer.

Some might argue that we are only now getting it right—that America's newspapers and the protections they need are only now reaching full maturity in American society. But if true, these developments are occurring just as American newspapers confront their most serious challenge ever. The rise of the internet has destroyed traditional sources of advertising revenue, forcing newspaper closures, staff reductions, and a mad scramble to figure out how the newspaper as an institution can survive in the digital age. Some newspapers have embraced the challenge, while others have simply shut down their presses—but if the history of the newspaper tells us anything, it is that while its form may change, the market for the news will persist and a group of journalistic entrepreneurs will rise to make sure the public gets the kind of news it wants to read.






Tugas softskill
http://www.shmoop.com/history-american-journalism/summary.html

History of Indonesian Journalism

Ideally, western journalists would be impartial or having non-partisan position. They are reporting and presenting factual news without taking any sides.
While in Indonesia, journalists had gone through some stages. In the 50s-80s, they were politically involved, aligned with certain political parties. They were called activist journalist. In 80s-90s, they were more into business and economic system, and news media was seen as business organization. In 2000s, activist journalists are back, and they are adopting western standard.

New Order

The Indonesian Press has been very closely linked with the political situation and power at the time, ever since the nation’s declaration of independence through the radio by Sukarno and Mohammad Hatta in 1945, who became the nation’s first President and Vice-President respectively. The following year the nation’s journalistic agency, PWI, was born. The PWI’s main goal is to address the problem of political bias and provide norms and guidance for professional journalistic practices. However, in the 1950’s most newspaper could be directly or indirectly classified as mouthpiece to various political and ideological parties. To counter this, President Sukarno then abandoned the liberal western democracy and adopted the guided democracy system and demanded PWI and the press to act under government direction and to promote Indonesian ‘values’ and the Pancasila ideology. Various government regulations were issued to eliminate opposition and to instruct journalists to support Sukarno’s political manifesto.
In 1966 General Soeharto launched a take over, signaling the start of a new political order which lasted for 32 years. Under the New Order, government control over the press became even stricter by using the Department of Information to exert control of the press and PWI; newspapers and all publications were closely monitored and controlled, crushing what little remains of the press freedom. During this time, PWI membership became mandatory to all journalists and only approved members can become editors or publishers. There were widespread corruption and unethical practices within the press community, such as the ‘telephone culture’, where editors of publications received a warning telephone call from the Department of Information if they published unflattering articles about the government or Soeharto’s family; and then there is also the ‘envelope culture’, which is basically monetary bribe given by government officials to journalists to publish or cover a story supporting the government. These two cultures have been a thorn within the press community because they impede the quality and integrity of journalists, however more often than not; the press community has to participate in order to survive, especially with the ‘envelope culture’ where the salary of a journalist can barely cover daily needs. Many journalistic organizations were disbanded by the government, until only PWI remains; and with its structure dominated by governmental people, PWI became the mouth piece for the government.
In June 1994, three major news publications, Detik, Tempo, and Editor, were permanently closed and their licences revoked by the Department of Information for publishing controversial articles which were critical towards the government. These closures provoke protests and demonstrations from various non-governmental organizations and from the society. Seeing the PWI as failing to stand up for the press community, a few weeks after the banning, a group of 85 journalists and intellectuals created a rival organization, AJI. This new organization, AJI, is fundamentally different from its government-controlled counterpart. Officially PWI serves as association of journalists, but many of its members are also members of political parties, mainly Soeharto’s political party Golkar, and acted as political agents against differing ideology such as communism. AJI is mainly a journalistic organization with no affiliation with any political ideology other than that of the freedom of the press. Since the government only recognize one official organization, AJI, operated illegally. The government and PWI continually put more pressure on AJI, arresting many of its members and threatening anyone or any publication that sympathizes with them, such as the case where PWI withdrew its support for the editor of D&R magazine for employing AJI members. Under heavy pressure, many AJI members were forced to resign from their jobs or transferred to distant position and location, and some were arrested for spreading anti-government views and distributing unlicensed publication. However some AJI journalists managed to continue to work and write using different name, and many of its members also found a loophole in the form of internet publishing.

Post New Order

After the collapse of the New Order regime, the political situation is much more hectic, with many differing political parties vying for power and influence. The Indonesian Press community, especially PWI, is also busy to adapt with the newly received freedom and to re-establish its image as an agent of change for the society instead of as an agent of stability for the government. In October 1998, PWI elected new executive and senior editors to try to separate itself from the New Order image. Different ideologies started to emerge and voicing their values through any media publications willing. Rules and regulations on media journalistic industry were reviewed, and AJI was officiated. Private tv channels are now more transparent, not controlled by Soeharto’s family anymore and media licensing to set up and publish newspaper, radio station and tv station is more public.
Because of these changes, though government is more lenient, it is now the community groups (religious group, ethnicity group etc) that have the voice. Self-censorship comes from these particular groups.

http://censorship.wikidot.com/indonesian-journalism-censorship