You are viewing the chat in desktop mode. Click here to switch to mobile view.
X
Lecture on Social Journalism
powered byJotCast
Prev Page View Full Chat Next Page
Sujan
6:06
A student asks Jarvis, "While you have an NYT, you also have Fox. How can we balance out good platforms?" He exemplifies his question, with how Facebook has contributed to the crisis in Myanmar.
6:08
Jarvis further exemplifies with how he has watched Indian TV people yelling at each other, just making money rather than disseminating information.
He shares his insight, "I think it comes back to listening. We are not good at it. We go out and find out quotes but write what we already know."
6:09
Bhavya asks, "When you talk about empathy, what kind of role would media play during COVID? How does it hinge on conversations with communities?"
"I think it comes back to listening. We are not good at it. We go out and find out quotes and write what we already know. That's why I think we should empathise by re-asking if we did the right job. Empathy doesn't mean accepting what is unacceptable but to know what they want to say," answers Jarvis.
For the second question, he says very poignantly, "If you don't have access then you can't participate."
6:11
Neeladri asks Jarvis about the higher obligation as a social media person and how to navigate between knowledge, click-baits and the social obligation.
6:14
Jarvis responds that he has learnt a lot from watching the sciences and how social media impacted that field, from disseminating information, publishing science papers to using Twitter to review questions and scientists.
6:15
Jarvis finds that very fascinating. He says that we can look at that from the perspective of journalism.
"We have much to learn how science has operated during this time," opines Jarvis. He thinks that social media has played the role of an enabler of communities in the fields of science by building a bridge between communities.
Iniyan asks, "You have mentioned about nurturing relation with communities but what about readers? How are we going to make a conversation with them?"
Jarvis answers, "The first newspapers published letters, early novels published letters. It's a bridge genre. But the newspapers became about stories today and so did the internet. In coming days, we may use new tools and we can introduce new ideas about how to communicate with the audience."
He adds, "I think the issue is that we thought that we were objective when we were being subjective. We need to be true about what we know and don't know, we must be transparent and let our audience decide about our news."
6:17
Anushka asks, "We have spoke a great deal bout social media, now journalism faces a lot of issues with copyright, lot of people look up to big tech companies for fact checking, what do you think of these expectations?"
"I think what we are seeing is that major media companies believe that social media stole their revenue. I don't think they stole it. I think technology gave their customer a better deal to advertise. I think platforms owe public better mechanisms, not publishers to make them money," says Jarvis sharply.
6:19
Are journalists being empathetic enough while covering communities?
Yes (0% | 0 votes)
 
Yes, but there is need for improvement (66.7% | 2 votes)
 
No (33.3% | 1 vote)
 
Total Votes: 3
Ananya asks Jarvis: "We see that social media has brought forth so many voices, but we also see fake news spreading, inciting violence and wars. How can we make it a safe place?"
6:20
Jarvis ruminates, and says: "I don't know yet. I think it's an important question."
6:21
He talks about the history of the press. He says, "Looking back to when printing started, there was a lot of fake news which created wars. But we built institutions. We need to build institutions in such a way. But we haven't."
6:23
Sourish asks Jarvis: "You mentioned that objectivity is about power dynamics. In india I have seen a particular pattern in the way queer issues are conveyed in mainstream Indian news media. The portrayal becomes a matter of extracting a story and leaving it at that. So, in that context of Indian journalism, how do you suggest that journalists invest in a community-centric approach, especially when the rhetoric has been that the Indian audience is not ready to hear queer issues, or that’s what the excuse has been."
6:27
Jarvis responds, "I think that it becomes a question of us having the responsibility to amplify the voice."
He talks about the experience in the US where some people had the courage to come out of the closet and the issue was also a part of sitcoms.
Jarvis believes that it should be the job of Facebook and the journalists to make this a major issue. He observes that there is a need to bring empathy in the public for queer people. What needs to be done is to allow them to tell their stories and not snatch away the voices.
6:28
He emphasises the need for people to be ready to grapple with freedom and new systems.
"It is easy for me to say these things, but for those who cannot afford to, it is our responsibility to help them do it," asserts Jarvis.
6:30
Sourish asks another question about how to ensure that ways of representing do not become condescending.
6:31
Jarvis responds with the case of the 'melting pot' culture of US, and laments how that manifests in everything becoming similar.
6:32
"Instead, we have to value everyone as individuals and we have to treat queers as millions of individuals and help to amplify their voice," states Jarvis.
Medha asks, "In everything you said, the active player is the community, what then is the government's role in this?"
 Jarvis mentions Aeropagitica and says, "I get very nervous about the government in journalism. I think they should stay out. I have a problem about the law of hate speech in Germany. Government should stay out."
"We protect the people from news, truth but I think the government shouldn't be doing that. It has jails, courts, taxes and can use that against us. Responsibility of journalism is to keep them useful for the public and not promote their faults," he adds.
6:33
Suyashi asks, “In US universities there was a covid outbreak, and students and faculty were  banned from reporting to the media. How do we bring these stories that are important, but can cause harm to people whose stories are being told?
“What occurs in public is theirs, our work is to report it. But if we report against the government by taking names, we are risking their safety. It is a difficult balance. We free up information -  that's our mission, but make sure it doesn't hurt anyone,” advises Jarvis.
6:37
6:38
Siddhesh asks: "In a country like India, where there are various communities having diverse, at times, antagonistic worldview. In this scenario, how does reporting from the viewpoint of a particular community help? How can a journalist pursuing social journalism hedge the danger of creating further fissures within the society?"
"That's where the job of adding context comes in," exclaims Jarvis.
6:39
Jarvis elaborates the problem with a question: "Can journalists call Trump a liar?". "No," he says.
"Can we call him a racist?"
"Not directly, but in safe words!" he adds.
"We need to add context with direct opinions. We have to make judgments but with transparency. This is not easy," Jarvis states.
Saptarishi poses a question, "In the world of social media, everything is being driven by opinions. Why are journalists told to avoid opinions?"
Jarvis shares a valuable insight, "There's plenty of opinions in the world. It's not our primary job to give opinions; it's to form opinions, by giving them information and facts."
6:41
He explains that instead of adding opinions, journalists should report the opinions to everyone else.
6:42
He opines that journalists should act human instead of being the institutional voice that people don't trust.
6:43
However, he warns that we can have our lived experience and have our perspectives, but we need to bring facts to them.
6:44
Moyurie asks a question about the future of new media at a time when companies are increasingly taking up politically driven policies.
6:45
Jarvis shares, "I think that we have learned the importance of internet. For those who have it, thank goodness we have it!"
6:46
But he says that now journalists are not going out and he emphasises the need to use the internet to bring stories.
He remarks, "We are not at a point where internet is essential to journalism."
He urges the student journalists: "You are the ones to reinvent journalism. I'm dependent on you for that."
6:47
Connecting…