[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 2 (Wednesday, January 28, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E53-E54]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             ``A WELCOME ENTRANT INTO AN IMPORTANT DEBATE''

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. BARNEY FRANK

                            of massachusetts

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, January 28, 1998

  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, during our recess I was 
delighted to have a chance to address a forum sponsored by the 
Committee of Concerned Journalists at the Columbia School of Journalism 
in December. This committee, chaired by one of our most distinguished 
journalists, Bill Kovach, deals with the critical subject of the 
responsibility of people in the journalism profession. I attended as 
one who both believes passionately in the importance of a free and 
vigorous press for our democracy, and is disappointed in the work 
product of that journalism much of the time. Because it is wholly 
inappropriate for government at any level and in any form to try to 
dictate to journalists, even for the best of reasons and under the best 
of motives, it is essential if we are to see the improvements that I 
think necessary in this area that we have this sort of self-scrutiny by 
distinguished journalists.
  It is for this reason that I welcome and congratulate the journalists 
who have convened this committee and the work they are doing. Because I 
believe this deserves the full attention of everyone concerned about 
the state of our democracy, I ask that their organizing statement be 
printed here, along with the list of those who serve as the leadership 
of the committee. As of the end of October more than 400 journalists 
had signed on as members, and while that list is--happily--too long to 
be printed here, I would be glad to share it with any who are 
interested.

            Committee of Concerned Journalists--An Overview

       The Committee of Concerned Journalists is an unusual 
     collaboration of reporters, editors, producers, publishers, 
     owners and academics worried about the future of their 
     profession.
       The group believes this is a critical moment in American 
     journalism. Revolutionary changes in technology, in economic 
     equations, in our relationship with the public, threaten the 
     core principles that define journalism's role in democratic 
     society.
       With splintering audiences and information overload, 
     companies at once diversifying and merging, confronted by 
     unimaginable complexity, we have begun to doubt ourselves and 
     the meaning of our profession.
       To secure journalism's future, the group believes that 
     journalists from all media, geography, rank and generation 
     must be clear about what sets journalism apart from other 
     endeavors. There is a price for our press freedoms: We have a 
     professional obligation to broker honestly the information 
     that citizens must have to fulfill their duties in a self 
     governing society. It is well enough to entertain and amuse, 
     but we must also provide democracy's grist and glue.
       The group is proposing to seek a clear expression of those 
     purposes and those core principles that unite journalists and 
     define journalism. We have issued a statement of concern, 
     articulating why a national effort at self examination is 
     necessary. That statement is circulating in newsrooms across 
     the country, gaining signatories. The plan is to convene 
     public meetings for all types of journalists and the public. 
     The group will listen carefully for common ground and then 
     prepare a written report on what we have learned. It will not 
     be a report of recommendations or a code of conduct. Like the 
     seminal Hutchins Commission Report ``A Free and Responsible 
     Press'' 50 years ago, the report will attempt to clarify the 
     common ground journalists share.
       The series, which begins in November in Chicago and ends in 
     Boston next June, will examine key questions of principle. 
     What is journalism? Who is a journalist? Can journalism 
     really be neutral? What are the responsibilities imposed by 
     the First Amendment? More than half a dozen major educational 
     institutions have already agreed to sponsor them.
       This is only a beginning. A web site will serve as a host 
     for discussions about forum topics, current news stories and 
     other journalistic issues. We believe other projects will 
     evolve.
       The effort was convened by the Nieman Foundation and the 
     Project for Excellence in Journalism in June 1997 in Boston. 
     The Committee is an extraordinary group. Members come from 
     various media, backgrounds, ages and institutions, from David 
     Halberstam, the New York author, to Mark Trahant, a Navajo 
     Indian newspaper editor from Idaho; from Lucy Himstedt Riley, 
     a news director in Montgomery, Ala., to Vanessa Williams of 
     the Washington Post and the President of the National 
     Association of Black Journalists, to the heads of several 
     journalism schools.
       The group has no set agenda. It is not interested in 
     placing owners at odds with reporters, journalism with 
     business, print with TV or the internet. It is simply a 
     united belief that journalism is a unique form of 
     communication. It is a mission, a service. We must 
     communicate what that means.


                         A Statement of Concern

       This is a critical moment for journalism in America. While 
     the craft in many respects has never been better--consider 
     the supply of information or the skill of reporters--there is 
     a paradox to our communications age. Revolutionary changes in 
     technology, in our economic structure and in our relationship 
     with the public, are pulling journalism from its traditional 
     moorings.
       As audiences fragment and our companies diversify, there is 
     a growing debate within news organizations about our 
     responsibilities as businesses and our responsibilities as 
     journalists. Many journalists feel a sense of lost purpose. 
     There is even doubt about the meaning of news, doubt evident 
     when serious journalistic organizations drift toward opinion, 
     infotainment and sensation out of balance with news.
       Journalists share responsibility for the uncertainty. Our 
     values and professional standards are often vaguely expressed 
     and inconsistently honored. We have been slow to change 
     habits in the presentation of news that may have lost their 
     relevance. Change is necessary.
       Yet as we change we assert some core principles of 
     journalism are enduring. They are those that make journalism 
     a public service central to self government. They define our 
     profession not as the act of communicating but as a set of 
     responsibilities. Journalism can entertain, amuse and lift 
     our spirits, but news organizations also must cover the 
     matters vital to the well being of their increasingly diverse 
     communities to foster the debate upon which democracy 
     depends. The First Amendment implies obligation as well as 
     freedom.
       For much of our history, we believed we could let our work 
     enunciate these principles and our owners and managers 
     articulate these responsibilities. Today, too often, the 
     principles in our work are hard to discern or lost in the 
     din, and our leaders feel constrained.
       Now we believe journalists must speak for themselves. We 
     call on our colleagues to join as a community of 
     professionals to clarify the purpose and principles that 
     distinguish our profession from other forms of communication.
       Since the change we face is fundamental, it requires a 
     response of the same magnitude. We need a focused examination 
     of the demands on journalism of the 21st Century.
       We propose to summon journalists to a period of national 
     reflection. First, we ask our colleagues young and old to 
     sign this declaration of concern. We believe the consortium 
     of journalists who share a commitment to common principles is 
     so broad and so significant that it will constitute a 
     powerful movement toward renewal.

[[Page E54]]

       Next we will convene a set of public forums around the 
     country over the next several months to hear the concerns of 
     journalists as well as other interested individuals. The 
     forums should reiterate two simple messages: that journalists 
     of all generations are concerned about the direction of the 
     profession; and that they want to clarify their purpose and 
     principles. We do not presume to enumerate those principles 
     here, but hope to have them articulated through the forums. 
     These sessions, will include the public. We will publish an 
     interim report after each one. At their conclusion, the group 
     will release a final report that will attempt to define the 
     enduring purpose of journalism, along with its principles, 
     responsibilities and aspirations.
       We see this as a beginning, a catalyst forging new ideas 
     and a renewed spirit of conviction. We plan to carry the 
     dialogue forward with a web site, videotapes of the forums 
     and through other means. We do not intend to propose a set of 
     solutions: this is an attempt to clarify our common ground. 
     Nor is our motive to develop a detailed code of conduct: if 
     journalism is a set of aims, how we fulfill them should 
     change with changing times and be left to each news 
     organization to decide. But if journalism is to survive, it 
     falls to individual journalists, especially in each new 
     generation, to articulate what it stands for.

     

                          ____________________