Journalists should not be mistaken for experts.
I’m not saying a reporter can’t have deep, specific knowledge. Most do. Everyone I meet in Journalists Club, for instance, has expertise on their beat.
The pitfall comes when journalists position themselves as experts, as if the job title alone means they (we) know what they’re talking about.
That changes the gig and misses the mark.
Without humility, it’s harder to keep curiosity as the North Star. The best reporters I’ve met are those who are comfortable with how little they know.
Any expertise a journalist may glean from reporting should be in service of translating and communicating — not moralizing or grandstanding.
Semafor, for one, is great at differentiating between a reporter’s opinion and the facts. It’s helpful and transparent.
But this practice isn’t the norm. It’s not unusual for legacy outlets to blend reporting and opinion without clarifying what’s what.
And one consequence of putting “spin” on a story is the suspicion of future spin.
To that point, Gallup data shows Americans’ trust in media is at record lows.
For me, I’d like to believe I have a solid grasp on markets and investing after several years covering Wall Street. But I’d never say I’m a financial expert.
I do my best to allow the gaps in my own knowledge to guide my reporting, rather than what I think I already know. I learned this working with editors Max Adams and Jason Ma during my time at Business Insider.
The best stories come from good questions.
The best questions spring from blind spots, not certainties.
Some things I aim for when I write:
- Interrogate all assumptions
- Let readers draw their own conclusions
- Communicate, rather than dictate
- Meet readers where they stand (or, don’t write from the Ivory Tower)
It’s not as if this profession comes with some intellectual high ground. If being a journalist meant being an expert, it would blur the meaning of even-handed reporting.
And that’s just not the gig.
Be First to Comment