“Being a Journalist Is Not Like Working on a Baked Bean Factory – Journalists Have a More Social Role That Goes Beyond the Production of Commodities to Sell in the Market Place.” (Harcup) How True Is This?

“Being a journalist is not like working on a baked bean factory – journalists have a more social role that goes beyond the production of commodities to sell in the market place.” (Harcup) How true is this?
According to an article appeared in The Guardian in December 2010, almost 15 million nation and regional daily newspapers are sold in the UK every day. Many more people also regularly use Internet sites, radio and television programmes to access information. Despites a highly discussed question of objectivity of transmission of information, through their texts and scripts journalists communicate with their readers and listeners on every step of sending information one to another.
That is why Harcup (2004) insists that journalists have a more social role than just making of products to be sold. They not only inform people of recent and forthcoming event and general state of world society, but also amuse, entertain and inculcate individuals with the values, beliefs, and codes of behavior though the mass media, which serves as a system for communication messages and symbols to the general populace (Herman and Chomsky in Tumber, 1999:166).
In today’s democratic society journalism is mainly important. Through journalism (through a new developing phenomenon of citizen journalism in particular) people are considered by many members of society to have their voice. Kovach (2005) suggests that journalism enables citizens to have their voices heard by representatives of political power and allows members of public to monitor and moderate the sources of power that shape their lives. “Journalism and self-government were born together. Journalism and self-government will rise or fall together,” he said in his speech given in Madrid in February 2005.
From the side of journalists, they communicate with public in completely different way – journalists do not suggest thoughts and ideas to people but shape them in pieces they transmit their readers or listeners. The agenda-setting function of mass media has been particularly important to control society and gradually turn their mind into a required way. McCombs and Shaw (1999:321) said: “The mass media force attention to certain issues. They build up public images of political figures. They are constantly presenting objects suggesting what individuals in the mass should think about, know about, have feelings about.”
Newspaper editors choose what their readers will read and what they will think about. Some individuals are especially easy to be influenced by what they hear and read. Moreover, many people tend to buy the same daily newspaper for years, so even if they claim they do not believe anything it says, gradually their opinion match the newspapers agenda – or else they would not be its regular readers.
In his examining of work of a wire editor of a morning newspaper in an industrialized midwest city, White (1997) outlines that this wire editor who was named “Mr. Gates” is highly subjective in selecting news to be put into newspaper. He has to choose about 10% of all information he receives throughout the day, and his choice is generally based on his out vision of what will be most suitable for the newspaper, as well as on his judgment and attitude towards the content of a written piece.
So, in other words, he imposes his own opinion on his readers and makes them receive only that information that he founds appropriate. Due to this fact, his readers cannot see the whole picture of what is happening and cannot make fair judgment. Moreover, in many cases, they do not even know that other information exists. Not many people will access a number of different sources – in majority of cases they have two or three regular providers of information.
This kind of treatment of a reader by journalists makes their communication one-way. Although members of public can find access to news writers, they are likely not to have a response. On other side, newsreaders a forced to receive information in the way journalists transmit it to them. White (1997) insists there is the formation of symbols in the mind of the communicator (journalist) and related to them symbols which appear in the mind of the receiver (reader). The aim of a journalist is to make those symbols seen by the receiver maximally similar to what they originally meant.
On the other hand, there is a widely spread opinion among researchers (Herman and Chomsky, Kovach and others) that communication between members of public and journalists does not exist, and the social role of journalism is limited on transferring information they have to transfer. Kovach (2005) said: "What differentiates poor people from rich people, is lack of voice. The inability to be represented. The inability to convey to the people in authority what it is they think. The inability to have a searchlight put on the conditions of inequality.”
Herman and Chomsky (1999: 172-174) in their famous work Manufacturing Consent explore the influence of the power elite on mass media. They consider sources as of the filters of news and insist that power sources are the most valuable as they can not only provide support to media organisations, but they are also the most trusted by the readers. Keeping close contact with such sources includes some acquiescence from the side of a media organisation. It often means setting the source’s agenda, which will be transmitted to readers.
Taking into account all mentioned above, a question arises: it communication is one-way, can it be called socialization? If socialization must include two parties, which is not fulfilled in this case, than social role of journalism remains an open question.
In the time of dramatic changes of the shape of journalism and uncertainty of its future, it is difficult to make conclusions on its relationships with readers. Especially difficult it is because of major changes in the way journalism can receive feedback from readers. Using the facilities modern technologies such as news organisations’ websites provide, members of public have much easier ways to be heard, and these facilities are still being explored.

REFERENCES
Harcup, T. 2004. Journalism: Principles and Practice. London: Sage
Herman, E.S. and Chomsky, N. 1999. Manufacturing Consent. In Tumber, H. (ed.) News: A reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 166-179
Kovach, B. February 1, 2005. Speech given in Madrid, Spain
McCombs, M.E. and Show, D.L. 1999. The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media. In Tumber, H. (ed.) News: A reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 320-328
White, D.M. 1997. The “Gate Keeper”: A Case Study in the Selection of News. In Berkowitz, D. (ed.) Social Meanings of News: A Text Reader. London: Sage. 63-71
Greenslade, R. 2010. Look how many newspapers are still sold every day in the UK... http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2010/dec/14/newspapers-abcs (visited on 06.05.2012)

References: Harcup, T. 2004. Journalism: Principles and Practice. London: Sage Herman, E.S. and Chomsky, N. 1999. Manufacturing Consent. In Tumber, H. (ed.) News: A reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 166-179 Kovach, B. February 1, 2005. Speech given in Madrid, Spain McCombs, M.E. and Show, D.L. 1999. The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media. In Tumber, H. (ed.) News: A reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 320-328 White, D.M. 1997. The “Gate Keeper”: A Case Study in the Selection of News. In Berkowitz, D. (ed.) Social Meanings of News: A Text Reader. London: Sage. 63-71 Greenslade, R. 2010. Look how many newspapers are still sold every day in the UK... http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2010/dec/14/newspapers-abcs (visited on 06.05.2012)