Lets talk about a reporters privilege and how it may or may not be abused. Specifically talking about ambush journalism. Ambush journalism is usually a reporter suddenly interviewing someone when they are not ready to speak or even willing to speak to press. It is usually done in a public space such as a parking lot, homes, vacation destinations, or even hallways. Some may view ambush journalism as a form of sensationalizing the very topic or persons they are talking to or about. Ambush tactics were a large part of reports done on the O'Reilly factor featuring these tactics performed by Bill O'Reilly himself, Geraldo Rivera, and Jesse Watters. Ambush journalism is what TMZ has made there mark with, ambushing celebs at home or at a public place to either criticize or just generally act rude. It is almost the only tactic used by paparazzi. Now many journalist may view ambush journalism with disdain or disgust as it seems a cheap trick to use to try and get info on or from your subject.
Now its hard to think that suddenly running up to someone and shoving a camera and a microphone in their face and expect them to have a deep conversation with you on the topic you want to speak about. It is forcing yourself under the guise of journalism on someone and not expecting them to be upset unless that was the goal in the first place.
Now in my opinion ambush journalism is a cheap tactic but in some cases i can understand its use as a tool. In this video a journalist ambushes Matt Damon at a teachers rally there to support his mother, who herself is a teacher, and he as he should put her in her place after insulting teachers and his work ethic. There is a very thin line between assertive journalism and ambush tactics. Michael Moores documentary "Roger and Me" these exact tactics are used but are they defensible? If the subject of the interview has been dodging meetings or you as a journalist then yes in some cases it may defensible such as the subject of Roger and Me who was supposedly involved in international money laundering. The point is it all boils down to how you come about the interview, the topic, and how exactly you ambush the subject. It is a thin line between being an asshole and keeping your journalistic integrity.
Now its hard to think that suddenly running up to someone and shoving a camera and a microphone in their face and expect them to have a deep conversation with you on the topic you want to speak about. It is forcing yourself under the guise of journalism on someone and not expecting them to be upset unless that was the goal in the first place.
Now in my opinion ambush journalism is a cheap tactic but in some cases i can understand its use as a tool. In this video a journalist ambushes Matt Damon at a teachers rally there to support his mother, who herself is a teacher, and he as he should put her in her place after insulting teachers and his work ethic. There is a very thin line between assertive journalism and ambush tactics. Michael Moores documentary "Roger and Me" these exact tactics are used but are they defensible? If the subject of the interview has been dodging meetings or you as a journalist then yes in some cases it may defensible such as the subject of Roger and Me who was supposedly involved in international money laundering. The point is it all boils down to how you come about the interview, the topic, and how exactly you ambush the subject. It is a thin line between being an asshole and keeping your journalistic integrity.


Comments
Post a Comment