IMPACT OF SILENCE IN JOURNALISM

Abstract

Sometimes, the omission of certain sources’ information can be the best way to combat fake news and propaganda. However, some reporters involuntary are helping liars to spread false information and ideological commentaries with their news. Is it really an obligation of journalists to report everything provide for a clearly deceiver spokesperson?

Enrique Castejon-Lara

Major studies in Mass Communication recognize noise as a perturbation of message transmission. Noise, in this case, is any external content element that affects message comprehension. So that, noise is not the same thing than silence. An omission in a news chain may be part of the meaning of the own messages.

In that sense, in certain occasions, quietness can have stronger connotation than any word that journalists can write or pronounce. For that reason, reporters have to decide when omit sources’ quotes that can contribute to create an interested confusing information environment. He or she, ethically, cannot become a diffusion agent for fake facts promoters.

However, constantly we can read stories on newspapers, hear on radio or watch on TV broadcast reports about false facts only because they were announced by “important” sources. Today journalistic principles reject that old fashion rule. Prominence of a spokesperson is not a guaranty of truth.

Therefore, the major strike that journalist can do against information manipulators and propaganda agents, is introducing a deep gap in their deceiving communication strategies no reporting their false news. Only in that way, fake-fact promoters will understand the huge strong meaning of silence in journalism. A blocked liar source has, definitely, a big impact on honest journalism.