Reporters that are double sided.

There are journalists I have met whom I found to be of noble intentions and character, on the other hand ,there are those who are downright aggressive, they are both on a mission of human rights activism, and reporting, “so if you may  ask, are you on a human rights campaign or field reporting assignment? a combo mission I suppose.” “I am both,” she says confidently, “with special regards to this story I am able to expose human rights infringement and loopholes, the world will get to know what’s truly  going on around this place and someone might be able to do something about it”.

This in turn has created a wave of paranoia around many premises, when journalists appear on scene, peoples suspicions are raised, they say unto themselves, “the so called honest reporters think they are doing a great deed to the society by detailing every inch of activity that goes on in our firms, that will eventually have a long term negative effect on our company, so please”, says the manager to the junior staff,  “put a sign post outside the door there to let them know they are not welcome, in clear words write, PRIVATE PROPERTY, DO NOT TRESPASS, NO CAMERAS BEYOND THIS POINT, ANY ANAUTHRISED FILMING WILL BE REGARDED AS INDUSTRIAL ESPIONAGE”.

Over the first few decades media personality have been encouraged by the society to be more aggressive  in their information gathering pursuits, “go comrades, don’t let anyone oppress you, keep on fighting for your rights, your freedom of speech, never let anyone pin you down, nor deny you your privileges.”

This phrase sadly to say has created a new breed of newspersons who care less and less about the consequences of their reporting they word out anything they feel it should be known about then get surprised later of the outcomes.




0 0 votes



Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Scroll to Top