Gonzo journalism is a style of journalism which is written subjectively, often including the reporter as part of the story through a first person narrative. The style tends to blend factual and fictional elements to emphasize an underlying message and engage the reader. The word Gonzo was first used in 1970 to describe an article by Hunter S. Thompson, who later popularized the style. The term has since been applied to other subjective artistic endeavors.
Gonzo journalism tends to favor style over accuracy and often uses personal experiences and emotions to provide context for the topic or event being covered. It disregards the 'polished' edited product favored by newspaper media and strives for the gritty factor. Use of quotations, sarcasm, humor, exaggeration, and even profanity is common. The use of Gonzo journalism suggests that journalism can be truthful without striving for objectivity and is loosely equivalent to an editorial.
Gonzo Journalism is reporting fact like fiction after the first hand experience of reporter that is subjective.
In gonzo journalism, a journalist is free to participate in events and circumstances which may themselves be considered newsworthy. A gonzo journalist can actively participate in a political candidate's campaign without making any effort to appear politically neutral or unbiased.
The purpose of gonzo journalism would be to produce a brutally honest or highly subjective journalistic piece based on the real experience of a trained reporter writing from the inside. A gonzo journalist is not necessarily protected from law enforcement efforts, so even the legal ramifications of the journalist's actions could become part of the news story.
Critics of gonzo journalism consider the practice to be little more than sanctioned hedonism. Responsible journalists should not take it upon themselves to instigate news items or become completely immersed in the very culture or circumstances they have been assigned to observe. Gonzo journalists are a rare breed of writer, often possessing larger-than-life personalities and a "gonzo" or go-for-broke approach to the subject at hand.
Example of Gonzo Journalism is travel and living show. They travel to different places and explain it to the viewers according to their experience.
Saturday, May 9, 2009
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Journalism and Democracy
Journalism is a special branch of mass communication and is playing vital role in modern society. The journalism is mainly intended to inform the audiences regarding what is happening around them. The importance of journalism comes from the people's right to opinion and expression. Journalism is taken as inseparable part of nay democratic system. The press plays vital role in democratic society. It is an institution in its own right. Journalism has been considered as the fourth state in democratic system.
Journalism is the 'voice of voiceless' and it plays the role of 'watchdog' in the society. It is strong bridge between concerning authorities and the people. It handles people issues. In fact, press is the people's open forum. Press makes such an environment where people get information and be prepared in taking part in democracy. People's participation is the foundation of democracy. Press is the pillar of democracy.
Media functions in democracy as
•Informing the public
•Investigation
•Analysis
•Social Surveillance
•Public forum
•Mobilization
Mass media act as a link between the government and the people, thus building up the political fabric of the democracy. There are several channels through which the political leaders can express their views and rally public support for their policies. Through the mass media, the government can inform, explain and convince the public over their program .
The news media play also the vital role as 'watchdog' over the government, looking out for instances of malfunction and corruption. The public would have far less control over the affairs of the government without the probing questions of investigative reporters.
Access to information is essential to the health of democracy for at least two reasons. First, it ensures that citizens make responsible, informed choices rather than acting out of ignorance or misinformation. Second, information serves a “checking function” by ensuring that elected representatives uphold their oaths of office and carry out the wishes of those who elected them.
In some societies, an antagonistic relationship between media and government represents a vital and healthy element of fully functioning democracies. In post-conflict or ethnically homogenous societies such a conflictual, tensionridden relationship may not be appropriate, but the role of the press to disseminate information as a way of mediating between the state and all facets of civil society remains critical.
While media is considered to be a part of the civil society arena, it is well known that media overlaps other functional areas of democracy and governance. For example, support for media may yield results in governance activities, particularly those related to decentralization, anti-corruption, and citizen participation in the policy process. The rule of law may be further institutionalized by support for an independent media that keeps a check on the judiciary, reports on the courts, and promotes a legal enabling environment suitable for press freedom. Free and fair elections conducted through transparent processes require a media sector which gives candidates equal access, and relationship between media and society, and the most effective ways to strengthen the media's contribution to democracy. Given this, some missions have been hesitant to engage in media sector support, even though they recognize the important role it plays in democratic transition and consolidation. Other missions, daunted by the difficulty of reporting results in this field, have decided not to undertake media activities or to focus exclusively on training. Contextual factors such as the lack of a legal enabling environment and political will within the government, business, or civil society to support media freedom all constrain missions' efforts in media sector support.
Within the context of supporting democratic transitions, the goal of media development generally should be to move the media from one that is directed or even overtly controlled by government or private interests to one that is more open and has a degree of editorial independence that serves the public interest. If the media is to have any meaningful role in democracy, then the ultimate goal of media assistance should be to develop a range of diverse mediums and voices that are credible, and to create and strengthen a sector that promotes such outlets. Credible outlets enable citizens to have access to information that they need to make informed decisions and to participate in society.
A media sector supportive of democracy would be one that has a degree of editorial independence, is financially viable, has diverse and plural voices, and serves the public interest.
The public interest is defined as representing a plurality of voices both through a greater number of outlets and through the diversity of views and voices reflected within one outlet.
Sibert, Peterson and Schramm tried to understand the intterrelationship between political system and media system. In four theories of press, Sibert, Peterson and Schramm assert that the press is always a reflection of the social and political configuration within which it operates. As they exist in free and democratic nations, the North American press then, espouses Liberal ideas and principles. These principles that comprise two major theories of study, the Social Responsibility and Libertarian theory, are the basis upon which the free press should and does run in a democratic society.
In Authoritarian theory, the state system requires direct governmental control of the mass media.The media in authoritarian class are not allowed to print or broadcast anything, which could undermine the established authority, and any offense to the existing political values is avoided. Authoritarian system can be found in Myanmar, Saudi Arabia, etc. Press works as mouthpiece of government.
In libertarian theory, media serves to provide a forum in which people can exchange ideasThe media and government are interdependent of each other, and the media frequently challenges government.
In Soviet Theory, as authoritarian, acknowledge the government as superior to the media institutions. The mass media in Soviet model is expected to self regulatory with regard to the content of their messages. The government owns the media and uses for its own greater causes. It accepts no challenges to its authority. Free expression in not valued in this system and is often punishable.
In Social Responsibility theory, media are free and have editorial independence. Government and media are separate but both interact with each other. The press on its own sees its role as serving both its financial needs and serving the public's need for information.
Journalism plays a role of mediator between citizens and politicians. People’s voices are heard through media. Media gives citizens direct access to the public sphere, in the form of open forums, talk shows, live phone calling programs, studio debates about public affairs etc.
The representative function of journalism is today enhanced by the availability of fast, interactive technologies such as e-mail, text messaging, blogging and many more. All of which provide new ways for citizens to communicate with politicians and participate in public debate. These technologies fuel the democracy to become more developed.
Media played important role in bringing democratic struggle of our country. During the Janaandolan II, King Gyanendra took power and attacked Nepali press. Lots of foreign news channels were banned to broadcast in Nepal. Kantipur contributed a lot during this period. News papers were not allowed to publish against the government and F.M. radios were not allowed to broadcast news. But, after democracy, many new channels like Sagarmatha, A venues and other radio stations started.
Democracy also ensures press freedom. Media are controlled by the government in China. People are deprived of getting information but in democratic country like ours, people enjoy the right of getting information.
A responsible media equally helps in socialization of people into citizenship, democratization of the State and political society, institutionalization of civic culture through unfettered flow of information, and rationalized use of power in social relations. In a nascent democracy like Nepal, media can also help voters with the contents of civic and political education and strengthen the culture of democracy.
Media thus perform vital tasks of informing, socializing, communicating and articulating the power of the public and preparing them for social transformation and good governance.
It is government who regulates the nation so media should cooperate with government. The government has significant role in regulating. By various means, sometime government regulates, sometimes facilitates and sometimes develops the press. In the country like ours, government is the major advertisers like advertising about poliothopa, vaccination, use of CFL bulb. Besides, government needs to communicate with people and they choose media as tool.
Media can have editorial independence only if there is democracy. It can work freely without the intervention of government. Hence, journalism and democracy are interdependent.
Reference
www.adrianmonck.com
www.nepalnews.com.np
www.usaid.gov
www.8rooks.com
Journalism is the 'voice of voiceless' and it plays the role of 'watchdog' in the society. It is strong bridge between concerning authorities and the people. It handles people issues. In fact, press is the people's open forum. Press makes such an environment where people get information and be prepared in taking part in democracy. People's participation is the foundation of democracy. Press is the pillar of democracy.
Media functions in democracy as
•Informing the public
•Investigation
•Analysis
•Social Surveillance
•Public forum
•Mobilization
Mass media act as a link between the government and the people, thus building up the political fabric of the democracy. There are several channels through which the political leaders can express their views and rally public support for their policies. Through the mass media, the government can inform, explain and convince the public over their program .
The news media play also the vital role as 'watchdog' over the government, looking out for instances of malfunction and corruption. The public would have far less control over the affairs of the government without the probing questions of investigative reporters.
Access to information is essential to the health of democracy for at least two reasons. First, it ensures that citizens make responsible, informed choices rather than acting out of ignorance or misinformation. Second, information serves a “checking function” by ensuring that elected representatives uphold their oaths of office and carry out the wishes of those who elected them.
In some societies, an antagonistic relationship between media and government represents a vital and healthy element of fully functioning democracies. In post-conflict or ethnically homogenous societies such a conflictual, tensionridden relationship may not be appropriate, but the role of the press to disseminate information as a way of mediating between the state and all facets of civil society remains critical.
While media is considered to be a part of the civil society arena, it is well known that media overlaps other functional areas of democracy and governance. For example, support for media may yield results in governance activities, particularly those related to decentralization, anti-corruption, and citizen participation in the policy process. The rule of law may be further institutionalized by support for an independent media that keeps a check on the judiciary, reports on the courts, and promotes a legal enabling environment suitable for press freedom. Free and fair elections conducted through transparent processes require a media sector which gives candidates equal access, and relationship between media and society, and the most effective ways to strengthen the media's contribution to democracy. Given this, some missions have been hesitant to engage in media sector support, even though they recognize the important role it plays in democratic transition and consolidation. Other missions, daunted by the difficulty of reporting results in this field, have decided not to undertake media activities or to focus exclusively on training. Contextual factors such as the lack of a legal enabling environment and political will within the government, business, or civil society to support media freedom all constrain missions' efforts in media sector support.
Within the context of supporting democratic transitions, the goal of media development generally should be to move the media from one that is directed or even overtly controlled by government or private interests to one that is more open and has a degree of editorial independence that serves the public interest. If the media is to have any meaningful role in democracy, then the ultimate goal of media assistance should be to develop a range of diverse mediums and voices that are credible, and to create and strengthen a sector that promotes such outlets. Credible outlets enable citizens to have access to information that they need to make informed decisions and to participate in society.
A media sector supportive of democracy would be one that has a degree of editorial independence, is financially viable, has diverse and plural voices, and serves the public interest.
The public interest is defined as representing a plurality of voices both through a greater number of outlets and through the diversity of views and voices reflected within one outlet.
Sibert, Peterson and Schramm tried to understand the intterrelationship between political system and media system. In four theories of press, Sibert, Peterson and Schramm assert that the press is always a reflection of the social and political configuration within which it operates. As they exist in free and democratic nations, the North American press then, espouses Liberal ideas and principles. These principles that comprise two major theories of study, the Social Responsibility and Libertarian theory, are the basis upon which the free press should and does run in a democratic society.
In Authoritarian theory, the state system requires direct governmental control of the mass media.The media in authoritarian class are not allowed to print or broadcast anything, which could undermine the established authority, and any offense to the existing political values is avoided. Authoritarian system can be found in Myanmar, Saudi Arabia, etc. Press works as mouthpiece of government.
In libertarian theory, media serves to provide a forum in which people can exchange ideasThe media and government are interdependent of each other, and the media frequently challenges government.
In Soviet Theory, as authoritarian, acknowledge the government as superior to the media institutions. The mass media in Soviet model is expected to self regulatory with regard to the content of their messages. The government owns the media and uses for its own greater causes. It accepts no challenges to its authority. Free expression in not valued in this system and is often punishable.
In Social Responsibility theory, media are free and have editorial independence. Government and media are separate but both interact with each other. The press on its own sees its role as serving both its financial needs and serving the public's need for information.
Journalism plays a role of mediator between citizens and politicians. People’s voices are heard through media. Media gives citizens direct access to the public sphere, in the form of open forums, talk shows, live phone calling programs, studio debates about public affairs etc.
The representative function of journalism is today enhanced by the availability of fast, interactive technologies such as e-mail, text messaging, blogging and many more. All of which provide new ways for citizens to communicate with politicians and participate in public debate. These technologies fuel the democracy to become more developed.
Media played important role in bringing democratic struggle of our country. During the Janaandolan II, King Gyanendra took power and attacked Nepali press. Lots of foreign news channels were banned to broadcast in Nepal. Kantipur contributed a lot during this period. News papers were not allowed to publish against the government and F.M. radios were not allowed to broadcast news. But, after democracy, many new channels like Sagarmatha, A venues and other radio stations started.
Democracy also ensures press freedom. Media are controlled by the government in China. People are deprived of getting information but in democratic country like ours, people enjoy the right of getting information.
A responsible media equally helps in socialization of people into citizenship, democratization of the State and political society, institutionalization of civic culture through unfettered flow of information, and rationalized use of power in social relations. In a nascent democracy like Nepal, media can also help voters with the contents of civic and political education and strengthen the culture of democracy.
Media thus perform vital tasks of informing, socializing, communicating and articulating the power of the public and preparing them for social transformation and good governance.
It is government who regulates the nation so media should cooperate with government. The government has significant role in regulating. By various means, sometime government regulates, sometimes facilitates and sometimes develops the press. In the country like ours, government is the major advertisers like advertising about poliothopa, vaccination, use of CFL bulb. Besides, government needs to communicate with people and they choose media as tool.
Media can have editorial independence only if there is democracy. It can work freely without the intervention of government. Hence, journalism and democracy are interdependent.
Reference
www.adrianmonck.com
www.nepalnews.com.np
www.usaid.gov
www.8rooks.com
Role of Culture in forming Personality
Personality is the key factor in defining individual uniqueness and shaping an individual's course through life. Culture is the way of life. Culture is not only our conscious values, but also it's our assumptions about the way things are. Humans perceive and believe according to their cultural development. Culture represents one of the important factors of the personality modeling. The study of culture and personality seeks to understand the growth and development of personal or social identity as it relates to the surrounding social environment.
The cultural features of a society generate certain distinctive features in the children’s socialization. By using some common socializing elements and mechanisms, there may be formed common features of personality or a configuration of personality features typical for the members of a society. Within each society, there are one or several types of personality that the children have to copy. In the European cultures or in those of European type, to the main type of personality are associated the following features: sociability, kindness, co-operation, and even competitiveness, orientation to practice and efficiency, punctuality. The family and other factors of socialization transmit to the children these features, the conformation to them being controlled at a societal level.
The relation between culture and personality is obvious, while the personality forming consists mostly in the internalisation of the elements of a culture. In a stable and integrated culture, the personality is an individual aspect of the culture, and the culture is a collective aspect of the personality. In each society, the dominant culture coexists with a certain number of subcultures and countercultures. The socialization made within a subculture adds specific elements to the modal personality features. Thus, there appear differentiated personalities in relation to the subcultures (these latter being constituted on ethnical, social class, religious and occupational criteria.). One can differentiate the personality of a villager from that of a townsman, the personality of a worker from that of an intellectual, the personality of a Jew from that of a Turk etc.
Margaret Mead, a well-known pioneer in the field of Psychological Anthropology, studied cross-cultural patterns of child rearing. Mead's most famous study took place in 1925 in Samoa. Mead studied Samoan adolescents and determined that they were not marked by tension and rebellion as were adolescents in the United States. During her study, Samoan children were found to have more casual relationships with their parents and they also learn about sexuality naturally in the course of their daily lives. It was Mead's determination that American teenagers find adolescence stressful because they learn about sexuality at the same time they must break strong bonds with their parents. Mead also studied gender roles in three New Guinea groups and concluded that gender roles are not entirely biologically determined, but are learned during the process of enculturation.
Cultural psychologists have noted that some aspects of personality differ across cultural groups. For example, Americans and Asians have slightly different conceptions of self. American culture promotes a view of the self as independent. American children tend to describe themselves in terms of personal attributes, values, and achievements and they learn to be self-reliant, to compete with others, and to value their uniqueness.
Many Asian cultures, such as those of Japan and China, promote a view of the self as interdependent. Children from these cultures tend to describe themselves in terms of which groups they belong to. They learn to rely on others, to be modest about achievements, and to fit into groups.
Starting in infancy, we learn how to be human through interactions with other people in our culture. Without social stimulation, love, modeling and communication with others, a child does not become a normal social creature because it does not adequately develop language, or emotional expressiveness, or expected social responsiveness, or personality.
Culture cannot be separated from personality; culture mediates all thought. Human experiences and social interactions form personality marked by thought, communication, actions, customs, beliefs, values and institutions of a racial, ethnic, religious, and social group type.
Personal identity is deeply tied to cultural identity. We often believe we are destined to be like our parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents; to a great extent we are like them and their culture. Whether we are aware of it or not, we are the carriers of our cultural heritage that forms an essential part of our personal identity. It is possible, but difficult to change our understanding of our culture, but it is not possible to totally separate our personal identity from our culture. How we judge another person is a product in part of how well the individual lives up to the cultural values we ourselves have learned from our parents, teachers, and the others of significance around us.
Personality is shaped by both genetic and environmental influences. Among the most important of the latter are cultural influences. Culture is transmitted through language and the modeling of behavior when conditions permit humans to communicate through shared language, by living in the same historic period, and when they are sufficiently proximal to influence each other. Ecology, among other factors, shapes the culture, which in turn shapes the socialization patterns, which shape some of the variance of personality.Broad empirical support for such a model does exist. In addition to these factors, we consider other constructs that are needed for a better understanding of the way culture influences personality.
Reference
www.accessmylibrary.com
www.answers.yahoo.com
www.as.ua.edu
www.blogs.psychologytoday.com
www.directessays.com
www.lonnd.com
www.sparknotes.com
The cultural features of a society generate certain distinctive features in the children’s socialization. By using some common socializing elements and mechanisms, there may be formed common features of personality or a configuration of personality features typical for the members of a society. Within each society, there are one or several types of personality that the children have to copy. In the European cultures or in those of European type, to the main type of personality are associated the following features: sociability, kindness, co-operation, and even competitiveness, orientation to practice and efficiency, punctuality. The family and other factors of socialization transmit to the children these features, the conformation to them being controlled at a societal level.
The relation between culture and personality is obvious, while the personality forming consists mostly in the internalisation of the elements of a culture. In a stable and integrated culture, the personality is an individual aspect of the culture, and the culture is a collective aspect of the personality. In each society, the dominant culture coexists with a certain number of subcultures and countercultures. The socialization made within a subculture adds specific elements to the modal personality features. Thus, there appear differentiated personalities in relation to the subcultures (these latter being constituted on ethnical, social class, religious and occupational criteria.). One can differentiate the personality of a villager from that of a townsman, the personality of a worker from that of an intellectual, the personality of a Jew from that of a Turk etc.
Margaret Mead, a well-known pioneer in the field of Psychological Anthropology, studied cross-cultural patterns of child rearing. Mead's most famous study took place in 1925 in Samoa. Mead studied Samoan adolescents and determined that they were not marked by tension and rebellion as were adolescents in the United States. During her study, Samoan children were found to have more casual relationships with their parents and they also learn about sexuality naturally in the course of their daily lives. It was Mead's determination that American teenagers find adolescence stressful because they learn about sexuality at the same time they must break strong bonds with their parents. Mead also studied gender roles in three New Guinea groups and concluded that gender roles are not entirely biologically determined, but are learned during the process of enculturation.
Cultural psychologists have noted that some aspects of personality differ across cultural groups. For example, Americans and Asians have slightly different conceptions of self. American culture promotes a view of the self as independent. American children tend to describe themselves in terms of personal attributes, values, and achievements and they learn to be self-reliant, to compete with others, and to value their uniqueness.
Many Asian cultures, such as those of Japan and China, promote a view of the self as interdependent. Children from these cultures tend to describe themselves in terms of which groups they belong to. They learn to rely on others, to be modest about achievements, and to fit into groups.
Starting in infancy, we learn how to be human through interactions with other people in our culture. Without social stimulation, love, modeling and communication with others, a child does not become a normal social creature because it does not adequately develop language, or emotional expressiveness, or expected social responsiveness, or personality.
Culture cannot be separated from personality; culture mediates all thought. Human experiences and social interactions form personality marked by thought, communication, actions, customs, beliefs, values and institutions of a racial, ethnic, religious, and social group type.
Personal identity is deeply tied to cultural identity. We often believe we are destined to be like our parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents; to a great extent we are like them and their culture. Whether we are aware of it or not, we are the carriers of our cultural heritage that forms an essential part of our personal identity. It is possible, but difficult to change our understanding of our culture, but it is not possible to totally separate our personal identity from our culture. How we judge another person is a product in part of how well the individual lives up to the cultural values we ourselves have learned from our parents, teachers, and the others of significance around us.
Personality is shaped by both genetic and environmental influences. Among the most important of the latter are cultural influences. Culture is transmitted through language and the modeling of behavior when conditions permit humans to communicate through shared language, by living in the same historic period, and when they are sufficiently proximal to influence each other. Ecology, among other factors, shapes the culture, which in turn shapes the socialization patterns, which shape some of the variance of personality.Broad empirical support for such a model does exist. In addition to these factors, we consider other constructs that are needed for a better understanding of the way culture influences personality.
Reference
www.accessmylibrary.com
www.answers.yahoo.com
www.as.ua.edu
www.blogs.psychologytoday.com
www.directessays.com
www.lonnd.com
www.sparknotes.com
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)