|
|
BOOKS
Standards
and Practices
BY
TOM GOLDSTEIN
GOOD WORK: WHEN EXCELLENCE AND ETHICS
MEET
By Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, William Damon, and Howard Gardner
Basic Books 288 pages. $26.00
This
intriguing book offers important insights for journalists, who
all too often wrap themselves in their own cocoons, reveling in
a specialness that sets them apart from other professionals.
In an unusual collaboration that has lasted for five years and
promises to continue on for an even longer period, three prominent
psychologists, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi of Claremont Graduate University,
William Damon of Stanford, and Howard Gardner of Harvard, examine
the professional conditions that promote good work -- defined
as work in which practitioners maintain moral and ethical standards
-- in an increasingly market-driven world.
Since 1995, the authors have conducted hundreds of interviews
with people in a variety of disciplines, including business, philanthropy,
jazz music, theater, and education. In Good Work, the first book
to emerge from these studies, the authors make an original and
ingenious connection between genetics and journalism, "the
two domains that, in our time, have principal responsibilities
for shaping the information inside our bodies and our minds."
The contrasts between the two fields, teased out in more than
200 open-ended, in-depth interviews, are instructive. Geneticists
reported that doing good work was relatively easy, while journalists
struggled to integrate professional performance and personal ethics.
Geneticists are upbeat in a profession that the authors call exceptionally
"well aligned." That is, all the stakeholders -- the
shareholders, the company owners, the geneticists, and the public
at large -- want the same things: research that results in improved
health and longer lives.
In sharp contrast, the journalists, who have the "power to
shape our culture and our minds," despaired of being allowed
to pursue the mission that inspired them to enter the field in
the first place. The authors find that journalism is "poorly
aligned," wracked by tension, with stakeholders "threatening
the core values and the principal roles." The journalists
felt that the audience wanted celebrity-based news and that management
was preoccupied with the next quarter's bottom line.
In their interviews, journalists said they were pessimistic because
of "growing demands to comply with the business goals of
the industry" and the "perceived decline in value and
ethics within the field."
Some of those who were interviewed, including Ray Suarez, Bill
Kurtis, and Tom Brokaw, agreed to be named. But most were not
named, leaving the reader to accept on faith that the researchers
had selected leading practitioners for their semi-structured interviews.
These journalists also lamented that technology had undercut their
effectiveness. "Of all the resources in a newsroom it is
time that is coveted frequently by journalists," the authors
report. "'Too little time' was by far the most common complaint
mentioned by our informants. Journalists speak of time pressure
as a barrier to reflection, in-depth reporting, and accuracy of
coverage. There is now an acute sense, shared by most journalists,
that modern technology has escalated deadline demands to the point
where even the most rapidly executed work can no longer fare adequately."
In attitudinal studies such as this one, the past is not necessarily
a map for the future. The "euphoric" sense of alignment
felt by geneticists may shift, the authors speculate, particularly
if genetics continues to be practiced as an unregulated commercial
undertaking or if the field becomes more politicized.
Journalism, too, may shift. The researchers were heartened by
the idealism of journalists in their commitment to inform the
public.
Given the timing of the interviews, the "misalignment"
that the authors find so decidedly characterizing journalism has
a distinctly dated quality to it.
Many of these interviews were conducted during a period in which
the biggest running story was the exploits of Monica Lewinsky,
and the interviewees presumably assumed that the public "craved
news of celebrities." Since the terrorist attacks of September
11, journalists have risen to the occasion, a sentiment underscored
by Howard Gardner, who in a recent interview in the Harvard University
Gazette noted that "September 11 has given journalists a
new lease on what they should be doing."
Journalists have another chance. As the authors conclude in their
book, this is a "pivotal moment" for journalism in which
"the scales are hanging in a precarious balance."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Goldstein is dean of Columbia's Graduate School of Journalism.
|
|
|