Skip to content
Jun 24 / Richard Leivenberg

When defining journalism “quality,” we can’t let the tail wag the dog

Note: This is a response to yesterday’s B/R Blog post, Does the definition of quality journalism ever change?

The question of quality journalism looms over our industry due to the rapid rise of new technology. Newspapers never had an issue with this subject when their papers were delivered by newspaper boys on bikes.

I have lived through the various stages of the technology revolution. From manual typewriters to the introduction of fax machines into the newsroom right up to the integration of computers.

Writing for B/R changed everything I knew about how to gather information for a story. Instead of talking directly with a source, I now gather information online to back up or formulate a story. As a former newspaper editor, I am sure King Kaufman would never have let an article be published without the strict verification of facts and sources.

That is one thing I admire about B/R’s evolution. As a featured columnist, I am pushed by my B/R editors to link as many sources as possible for the facts and quotes I publish. In the old days, we would have to have very specific notes regarding statements by our sources. Today, we rely on articles and facts we find on the internet to substantiate our stories.

That is, of course, why B/R came under so much criticism early on. No self-respecting journalist would rely on the “facts” gathered by someone else. You always had to be the direct contact.

King writes that high quality journalism should “be the coverage and analysis our readers are looking for, delivered in formats and on devices that they want to use.”

The difficulty with this idea is whether the dog is wagging the tail or the other way around. As journalists, we should not let the delivery system dictate the message, but that is sometimes how it feels. We definitely want readers to read what we have written and that is where the quandary lies with the need to deliver information on “formats and on devices that they want to use.”

It is a tricky balancing act, especially for the old guard. They are late to the table and can learn a lot from B/R’s standards and approach.

At the same time, we cannot diminish the quality of our journalism no matter how the information is delivered.

* * *

Richard Leivenberg is a B/R Featured Columnist.