In the late 1960s and 1970s New Journalism was defined as journalism that used literary techniques such as a protagonist’s internal dialogue and was characterized by subjective reporting in which journalists inserted themselves into the story.
New Journalism was codified in a 1973 collection of articles published under the title of The New Journalism, edited by Tom Wolfe, and that included several of his articles as well as articles by Truman Capote, Hunter Thompson, Norman Mailer, Joan Didion and Gay Talese, among others.
The then New Journalism has faded out with the deaths of most of the self-absorbed writers and has been supplanted by two fresh forms of New New Journalism: the journalism of care and solution journalism.
The journalism of care is brilliantly described by Joe Mathewson in his recently published book, Ethical Journalism: Adopting the Ethics of Care. Mathewson writes that “American society and democracy have long been beset by three fundamental threats to the nation’s future: climate change, racial inequity and economic disparity.” (I agree with these three threats and their rank order.) The author then asks if conventional journalism ethics are enough to cover the multiple challenges and calamities America faces today:
Though coverage of the year’s tumult could be carried out quite professionally in conformity with the prevailing century-old ethics of journalism reflective of moral philosophy – honestly, truthfully, factually, fairly, sensitively, transparently – that simply does not measure up to the needs of our twenty-first-century society. Ethical journalism may be under attack and mistrusted by much of our divided population, but it is still the principal provider of verifiable facts – as opposed to unsupported emotion or malicious propaganda – to voting-age Americans. If substantial societal enhancement is to occur as a result of these historic moments, it will be led by authoritative, factual, ethical news media.
Mathewson then urges the news media to embrace the ethics of care, which he defines as:
“The ethics of care declares a moral standard based on human empathy, calling for an active response to the needs of others, rather than on cool, detached reason.” He then writes that: “The ethics of care takes no issue with journalism’s worthy standards of truth, facts, honesty, fairness, sensitivity and transparency. It simply asks more of the human species,” and that: “Still the major conduit of truth to the American public, journalism must not only point the way, but in fact lead the way, to a better, more equitable and more secure future.”
Furthermore, “Ethical journalism has the potential influence, indeed the power to persuade the public that vigorous government action is mandatory to alleviate these systematic threats, and that an engaged (or perhaps enraged) pubic opinion will finally persuade America’s leaders that they must act decisively or face removal.”
Does Mathewson’s ethics of care (the journalism of care) seem like advocacy journalism? Yes, in a sense, because it is advocating for caring, empathy and compassion, or how the three threats — climate change, racial inequity and economic disparity – affect individuals and families (not numbing numbers), especially those in the bottom, less fortunate quintile (bottom 20%).
The other form of the New New Journalism is solutions journalism, which is described in the September 3, “Your Undivided Attention Podcast” titled “The Power of Solutions Journalism.” The show notes describe solutions journalism:
What is the goal of our digital information environment? Is it simply to inform us, or also to empower us to act? The Solutions Journalism Network (SJN) understands that simply reporting on social problems rarely leads to change. What they’ve discovered is that rigorously reporting on responses to social problems is more likely to give activists and concerned citizens the hope and information they need to take effective action. For this reason, SJN trains journalists to report on “solutions angles.” More broadly, the organization seeks to rebalance the news, so that people are exposed to stories that help them understand the challenges we face as well as potential ways to respond. In this episode, Tina Rosenberg, co-founder of SJN, and Hélène Biandudi Hofer, former manager of SJN’s Complicating the Narratives initiative, walk us through the origin of solutions journalism, how to practice it, and what impact it has had. Tristan Harris and Aza Raskin reflect on how humane technology, much like solutions journalism, should also be designed to create an empowering relationship with reality — enabling us to shift from learned helplessness to what we might call learned hopefulness.
Does solution journalism sound like advocacy journalism? Yes, in a sense, because it is advocating for solutions to problems by reporting what other cities, states and governments have done to solve specific problems such as gang violence rather than just passively reporting on a problem.
With so many problems and calamities filling the pages of newspapers and the content of linear TV newscasts, readers and viewers tend to perceive mere reporting on crimes, crises and catastrophes as negative and depressing and so too often avoid them. On the other hand, news stories about solutions are perceived as positive and hopeful, and so are more likely to be read and engaged with.
I love the New New Journalism. As citizens and consumers of news, we don’t need the entertainment, outrage and lies of Fox News, we need journalism of care and compassion, and we need solutions, solutions that are good for our communities, not ideologies that are good for our individual narcissism.
