February 03, 2005

By hristova

Journalistic approaches

In chapter 2, Glassner tells us about one journalist's reaction to the reporting of workplace violence, that of Erik Larson. What does the account of Erik Larson's article reveal about journalists' reporting as it concerns workplace violence, specifically, and their approach to the reporting of crime in general? Why, do you think, is Larson's style of journalism so important, and why aren't there more journalists -- print and electronic -- like him?

Feel free to reply to this posting or to each other as the discussion proceeds.

Comments

Journalists try to make a big deal of small incident, they twist the facts so that their story gets more attention from the readers and sells more. Larson on the hand other stated the right facts and interpreted them in right manner. His style tells the readers what is true and not some twisted facts.

Posted by Rahul on February 4, 2005 11:33 AM

In most scenarios journalists are under pressure to meet bottom line profit amounts.As a result, most have the tendency to add a dramtic essence to most stories they report in order to spawn more interest. Larson resists this common practice, and instead practices the old styles of journalism, which do nothing more than report the facts.

Posted by Kevin Jack on February 7, 2005 12:27 AM