Writers of articles in a newspaper can be credited directly by having their names published, usually at the beginning or the end of the piece. Bylines are a much coveted element in print journalism. The publisher after all, can decide to use non-specific labels to indicate the writers of stories. But even these 'non-names' ought to be linked to the media organisation.
And if not, the use of such orphaned or ghost writers can be indicative of, but not limited to:
- The publisher not being comfortable with being associated with the content of the article.
- The publisher not ready or willing to take ownership/stand by the substance of the article, (legal suit evasion?).
- The writer not having contributed sufficiently in crafting the article, to deserve either a direct credit, or 'privilege' of being associated with the publisher.
- The subject matter of the article being too hot or potentially explosive, to warrant such distancing between the 'anonymous' writer and publisher
- The article being malicious or not having been published in good faith.
- An honest omission or dishonest commission.
In other words, there would be no need for such 'wide and wild' speculation, if there was the familiar pattern of using either a byline, Reporter or Correspondent of this or that media organisation, or even an external source providing the story
Not unless a general Reporter, with a visible general email address, adds hidden general news value.
An uncompromising critique of how the media covers topical issues, challenging traditional journalism concepts and charting fresh interpretations of news.
If you feel a news story does not measure up to expected journalistic standards, bring it to the Journalism Dry Cleaner. Through our collective wisdom, we will strip it of all offensive dirt.
REAL TIME VISITORS
BLOG GUESTS
Showing posts with label Bylines. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bylines. Show all posts
Thursday, 2 July 2015
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
