long before the rocket jumped into the sky this week, two news that not just gave the reason to sprake of optimism for the coming year.
First the North University state that they now want to collect journalism and kommunikasjonsstudiet in one master’s degree. This is presented on the solution of the problem the university has had to pull students to their bachelor’s degree in journalism. Then, it was known that Today’s Business cuts as well as all his culture criticism, and that the newspaper’s savvy reviewers must take with them the elegant tastaturfingrene to the other columns. This was based on the argument that the newspaper also is the main shareholder in Morgenbladet, and they have the reviewers still. So that. In both cases, there is talk about a reason the Norwegian school of management thinking that are used in areas where it does not fit, and can get to do damage.
In both cases there seems to be talk about a senseless chase after efficiency. Why have two critics when we can have one? Why have two trainings for people who are no matter to learn to write? To look for economies of scale is okay, and often advisable, for those who produce toothpaste or candles. Used as a management philosophy for the public is approaching the absurd. There are many journalists who take formidlingsferdighetene its over in the communications industry, when life as society’s watchdog loses the charm for them. the
But even if both journalists and kommunikasjonsarbeidere produce large amounts of text, is their jobs so different that they are almost opposites. The journalist must be careful about their independence. Kommunikasjonsarbeideren are a representative of a company or an institution. A journalist who is good at his job to talk with several sources, but keep the distance to them and do not let themselves be fooled by those who try to hide or minimize a problem. Kommunikasjonsarbeideren to defend the interests and reputation of the employer in any context. The ideals, techniques and missions of the two professions are so different that it doesn’t make sense to collect them under one mastergradsparaply. the
And not only does it not make sense: the Decision can build up under the skepticism of journalism and journalism’s methods to bring forth the facts, which in recent years have grown worryingly strong, by giving the impression that all communication is more or less the same, and in which the distinction between dependence and independence, to work for them to write about and that working for an independent newspaper or tv channel, is not important. the
If the North University really failed to entice enough students to study journalism with them, would the only remedy be to lay down the study in its entirety. Also Dagens Næringsliv careless avskilting by the critics, their means on the decision-makers who do not understand the field they are set to control. If it is about to do that there should be as few detractors as possible in English mediebransje, lose the criticism of his being. If it should so be, one could only appointed one national critic, a designated oracle that periodically can descend from on high to dictate what is good and what is bad. the
But the criticism should be a choir, a free and lively exchange between people from different standpoints and media with different traditions. It should be there so that the audience will be able to orient themselves in the offer of literature, movies and music, and for that kulturdekningen shall not be reduced to lanseringsintervjuer and advertising, where the one with the largest markedsføringsmuskler win the competition anyway. But, and just as important: The should also make sure that there is a parent, public conversation about the stories and the works that characterize the contemporary, so that the discussion about what they mean and how good they are, not only to find over vinglassene or on Facebook. the
There is a lot to that such texts are klikkvinnere. But it is important that they are there, that the arts should not be a small circulation for athletes and particularly interested. Dagens Næringsliv critics – here it should be mentioned that I know several of them – write less aware than Morgenbladets, and has ensured that Today’s Businesses have large credibility also in other areas than spesialdisiplinen finance and economics. Now intercepts the newspaper’s readers from getting opened interesting cultural doors by the critics. the
All must relate to the work they do has an economic side. Media houses as well as universities must avoid the direct waste. But the public is full of important tasks that are not immediately profitable. In the blånende Norway, this is something that is increasingly portrayed as a problem, also within the institutions to perform these tasks. Now the sacrifices they without any hesitation part of its own credibility in the drive for profitability, and the river with the credibility of the whole occupational groups in the same silly way.
