Journalism / Churnalism

Creating news and stories without researching and verifying the available information yourself is called Churnalism and is a form of journalism. The contents originate from available messages, press releases or other information and are processed into a product. This form of journalistic work is done mostly due to the enormous time and cost pressures, journalists and news stations in general are exposed nowadays. The Internet in particular amplifies faster messaging and non-stop content generation to withstand the immense competitive pressure. The Churnalism however harbors dangers like a loss of credibility of journalism, through lack of authenticity and proper research. Additionally incorrect information may circulate unaudited and facts could be distorted.The term of churnalism has been shaped by the Bbc journalist Waseem Zakir in the year 2008. How is this development to be assessed?

The result of churnalism is a reduction of quality and accuracy, as the articles are open to manipulation and distortion. Over 75% of the quality press aren't original and only 25% are created by reporters. But who or what determines what is quality press. Also every major news institution has always its part in the process of opinion formation. Whether conservative, liberal or left-oriented, each institution reports on a subjective way - and for that probably no great quality or effort are needed. Quality is a variety of opinion free, and dependent information about a theme in a way that makes it possible to form a personal picture and develop one's own opinion. This however lies more and more in the hands of the news consumers nowadays. Furthermore many large institutions - political as well as economical - establish official press agencies to issue their statements. In general this can be problematic. If such statements aren't checked because of "churnalistic" practices, those agencies can be used to lie to the unaware citizen. If people aren't committed to inform themselves through alternative services they will be provided with the same news in most magazines or news stations. This way the press agencies and secretaries spare the gullible reporter a lot of time-consuming work as no-one notices anything. This creates a variety of very one-sided reports. Investigative journalism loses importance with the aim to inform people critically and confront them with current topics. And when we look at the standard press precisely, sports news and gossip about the stars are highly sought, it should distract from real problems from industry and politics and it requires no great effort for such news. In the population there is anyway a great lack of interest in political issues so are the people in the submitted messages are not too critical.

Of course, the flow of information rose dramatically and very quickly through the Internet which doesn't make the processing of displayed messages easy. Hence journalists have to find new ways to handle the variety of information, so the right messages are always available at the right moment. Not only in the political and economical field you get certain information just in time. Also in the tabloids much information out of boards and social media come together. And here much information is passed mostly unexamined to the voyeuristic society. Mostly at the detriment of some alleged celebrities. On the other hand one has to say that you get a kind of snapshot through those unchecked and copied researches. Especially when reporting from crisis and war zones the collecting of raw information (from all camps) allows the consumer to form a comprehensive picture without the reporter embarking in direct danger or having to fly around half the continent for small reports. However, one must be aware these are mostly very sentimental news. In principle the students do nothing else for academic papers or other elaborations. They took certain information, values and formulas as certainly and well proved, without further research or review. Again, because of time saving and confidence in the given information. Also for this, it has happened before that one has passed misinformation or wrong/ outdated values were imposed.

In conclusion we could say "churnalism" is both: normal and healthy for news organizations, but it should not be an adventurous and entertainment news. It is necessary to process and pass the large amount of information. However its credibility should not compromise by blind trust. There are for me still a difference as sport and culture news. Where it usually really needs a flow of information. Areas such as politics and economics, however, should be regarded more critically and entlightened. Also the economic pressure on the reporter is not insignificant reason to work more efficiently. However, the reporter or "churnalist" should not lose the goal or the reference on the subject. With a little more effort and the necessary expertise, it is possible to filter a variety of misinformation and give the right information.