1
21st Century Literary Journalism:
Narrative Techniques and the Concept of Plot and Hero
Manuel João de Carvalho Coutinho
Doctoral Thesis in Science Communication
Specialty in Media and Journalism
Thesis presented to fulfill the necessary requirements to obtain the degree of Doctor in Science Communication – Specialty in Media and Journalism,
carried out under the scientific orientation by Professor Doctor Jacinto António Rosa Godinho and co-orientation by Professor Doctor Alice Maria
Quelhas Lima Donat Trindade.
We are obliged to receive the majority of our experience at second hand through parents, friends, mates, lovers, enemies, and the journalists who report it to us. Norman Mailer
A true thing badly expressed is a lie Stephen Fry
La vida no es la que uno vivió, sino la que uno recuerda y cómo la recuerda para contarla. Gabriel García Márquez
Dedication
I dedicate my efforts and work to my parents, Casimira Arminda Lourenço de Carvalho and Manuel Paulo Pinto Coutinho, for their support and patience; to my brother Sérgio Manuel de Carvalho Coutinho, who has always been there and always will; to my family, my childhood friends, my youth friends, and my university colleagues.
Acknowledgments
I thank my coordinator Jacinto António Rosa Godinho for his continued support as I pursue my aspirations, to my co-coordinator Alice Maria Quelhas Lima Donat Trindade for her methodology and attention to detail, to my external supervisor John S. Bak for his approach and insight; and to my family and friends who continue to help me while I explore new horizons.
21st CENTURY LITERARY JOURNALISM:
NARRATIVE TECHNIQUES AND THE CONCEPT OF PLOT AND HERO
RESUMO
Jornalismo literário é um termo que normalmente gera disputa, a razão de tal pode ser imediatamente perceptível a partir do seu nome: literatura e jornalismo são muito distintos um do outro e quando ambos são considerados no mesmo argumento, é expectável que seja para acentuar as suas diferenças e não as semelhanças. Ainda assim, o jornalismo literário procura indicar uma narrativa jornalística que usa e explora elementos literários que normalmente associamos apenas à literatura. Esta breve descrição, apesar de tudo, acentua ainda mais quão distintos a literatura e jornalismo são um do outro. Para conseguir verdadeiramente um entendimento do que é jornalismo literário, é preciso analisar ambas disciplinas separadamente antes de ser-se capaz de perceber o que verdadeiramente significa.
Esta investigação procura promover o estudo do jornalismo literário, particularmente o seu papel nos media portugueses. Para fazer isso, será importante primeiro considerar jornalismo tanto nas suas origens e propósito, de forma a ser-se capaz de o compreender melhor, questionando-se assim a sua razão de ser e utilidade. Em segundo lugar, considera-se a temática da literatura de forma a perceber-se uma possível conexão para com o jornalismo literário e as suas escolhas narrativas. Depois irá considerar-se o jornalismo literário como um género, de forma a ser-se capaz de perceber o seu lugar em Portugal e o seu desenvolvimento ao longo do Século XIX e XX. De seguida, este estudo irá estabelecer um diálogo com quatro jornalistas literários portugueses do Século XXI de forma a perceber melhor as suas perspectivas sobre os seus ofícios. Por fim, este estudo irá focar-se brevemente num futuro do jornalismo literário.
Palavras-chave: Jornalismo, Reportagem, Jornalismo Literário, Reportagem Literária, Literatura
ABSTRACT
Literary journalism is a term that usually generates dispute, the reason for which can immediately be perceived by its name: literature and journalism are very much distinct from one another, and when the two are considered in the same argument, it is expected that their differences and not their similarities are emphasized. And yet, literary journalism seeks to indicate a journalistic narrative that uses and explores literary elements that are often times only associated to literature. This brief description, however, further emphasizes how distinct literature and journalism are from one another. To truly grasp an understanding of what is literary journalism, one must analyze the two disciplines separately before being able to perceive what it truly entails. This investigation aims to promote the study of literary journalism, particularly its role in the Portuguese media. To do this, we must first consider journalism both through its origins and purpose, in order to understand it further, thus questioning its reasoning and usefulness. Second, it considers literary journalism as a genre in order to be able to discern its place in Portugal and its development throughout the 19th and 20th centuries. Next, this study will establish a dialogue with four Portuguese literary journalists of the 21st century in order to better ascertain their perspectives on their craft. Afterwards, literary journalism will be examined as a genre, in an effort to understand its place in Portugal and its development across the 19th and 20th century. Subsequently, this study will establish a dialogue with four Portuguese literary journalists of the 21st century in order to better understand their perspectives about their works. Finally, this study will focus briefly on the future of literary journalism.
Table of Contents
Introduction ... 1
Chapter 1 – Communication, Literature and Journalism: Connections and Crossroads .... 7
1.1. – Concerning Journalism: Functions, Possibilities and Roles ... 7
1.1.1. – Humankind and the Origins of News ... 15
1.1.2. – Symbolism, Fundamental Principles and Democracy ... 25
1.2. – Regarding Journalism’s Structure and Voice ... 37
1.2.1. – Investigative Journalism: Witness, Rationalize and Report ... 43
1.2.2. – Deconstructing and Exploring Investigative Reportage ... 53
Chapter 2 – Literary Journalism: Authors and the Concept of Plot and Hero ... 61
2.1. – Journalism that Reads Like Literature: Voices and Dichotomies ... 61
2.1.1. – Narratives, Chronicles and Reportage ... 71
2.1.2. – Literary Journalism: Journalists, Truth and Subjectivity ... 87
2.2. – Concerning Literature: Definitions, Borders and Journalism ... 107
2.2.1. – Regarding Journalism as Literature and the Matter of Plot ... 123
2.2.2. – Heroes, Protagonists and Characters in Investigative Journalism ... 139
2.3. – Journalism, Nonfiction and Portuguese Literary Journalism ... 151
2.3.1. – Pinpointing and Contextualizing a Literary Journalistic Narrative ... 159
2.3.2. – Brief Timeline of Portugal’s Literary Journalism (19th-20th Centuries) .. 165
Chapter3–21stCenturyLiteraryJournalismandtheArgumentforLiteraryReportage195 3.1. – A Country Full of Stories and a Contemplative Journalism ... 205
3.1.1. – Susana Moreira Marques and Now and at the Hour of Our Death ... 209
3.1.2. – Paulo Moura and Longe do Mar ... 233
3.2. – The Journalistic Voice and a World of Adventures to Report ... 255
3.2.1. – Tiago Carrasco and A Estrada da Revolução ... 259
3.2.2. – Alexandra Lucas Coelho and Reportage/Travel/Chronicle ... 281
3.3. – Making an Argument for Literary Reportage and Long-Form Journalism ... 301
Bibliography ... 313
Onomastic Index ... 337
Introduction
On the afternoon of June 17, 2017, a fire erupted in central Portugal and as it quickly spread, it became the deadliest in Portuguese history. Three days of national mourning were declared and for a whole week the fires were faced in many fronts by the Portuguese firefighters with the support of Spain, France, Morocco and Italy. The majority of deaths occurred in a road were many tried to escape leaving behind an image that was shown by Portuguese media for days and weeks in a row with burned cars and black trees still standing tall, amidst the destruction. The tense event led many newscast to report the story, with every TV channel broadcasting live and at times (too) close to the fire. From the many news reports that came at the time one was particularly careful and yet expressive in its approach. Journalist Ricardo Marques, working for newspaper Expresso, focused in one of his articles in that very road were the majority of deaths occurred, a road which began to be addressed by many as “the saddest road in Portugal”. Consider for a moment Marques’ article, particularly the following excerpt:
Theysayitisaroad,butitisnothingmorethananabsence.[…][O]nthe sidewalk a man asks for fire for his cigarette. “Have you seen the irony of this”, he asks […]. The man smokes and walks. He came from Venezuela yearsago,hesays,asifheneededtosaysomething.Thesilenceistoo lo-udwhenthereisnothingelsearound.[…]Thedirtsmellsburned,the smo-ke hides the sky and the sun, but the man walks. […] [S]ome kilometers ahead, in a curve, a fire engine is broken, with a shattered tire, next to a burning car. The sky is now darker, you can see smoke in the distance. A column of firefighters passes by slowly […]. They pass and wave to those who are by the sidewalk. The sadness waves to the desperation.1
Less than an hour after this article was published online, a competing news networkchooseadifferentapproach:openingitsnightlynewscastonthesametragedy,
1 Translated from the original: “Dizem que é uma estrada, mas não passa de uma ausência. [...] [N]a
ber-ma, um homem que pede lume. ‘Já viu a ironia disto’, pergunta [...] O homem fuma e caminha. Veio da Venezuela há uns anos, conta, como se fosse obrigado a dizer alguma coisa. O silêncio faz muito barulho quando não existe mais nada à volta. [...] A terra cheira a queimado, o fumo esconde o céu e o sol, mas o homem caminha. [...] [A]lguns quilómetros adiante, numa curva, um carro dos bombeiros está avariado, com um pneu destruído, junto a um carro incendiado. O céu fica mais negro, vê-se fumo ao longe. Uma coluna de bombeiros passa devagar [...]. Passam e acenam a quem está à beira da estrada. A tristeza a saudar o desespero.” As seen in: Marques, R. (2017, June 18). A Estrada mais triste de Portugal. Retrieved from: http://expresso.sapo.pt/sociedade/2017-06-18-A-estrada-mais-triste-de-Portugal-2 .
Portuguese TV channel TVI showed its pivot walking around the burned black trees. On a particular moment, the pivot stopped to face the camera and while delivering the news the camera operator framed the pivot on the left while on the right you could see a white tarpcoveringthebodyofoneofthedeceased.Andthereitstood,whilethepivot addres-sed the tragedy with this silent morbid scenery behind her. These two different approac-hestothesametragedyseemtoportrayatendencyofmodernmedia:ononehanda jour-nalist found that a longer narrative with a more human attitude was necessary to portray the troubling sight, while on the other hand a newscast found that portraying the tragedy with an anonymous dead body on sight was a wiser choice. The TV channel was quick-lycriticizedforthiswithmorethanhundredcomplaintsarrivinginfewhoursattheERC (entidade reguladora para a comunicação social – regulating entity for social communi-cation) leading this entity to open an enquiry whilst raising awareness for the need for professional sensibility.2 This approach does seem to reflect a modern paradigm for jo-urnalism:aneedtodothingsdifferently,sometimesriskingtheirintegrityintheprocess. Journalism as always searched for ways to reinvent their approach and methodology towards news reporting, now more than ever as its future seems at risk. Already in 1973, historian Pierre Nora presented the particularities that his generation was facing stating that “no other time has seen, like ours, its present being lived already with so much ‘historical’ meaning.”3
And while then Nora’s statement may have been accurate for its time, its veracity and acuity are far more relevant today, when democratic citizens are unavoidably connected to technology and information, “living” their present moments and events, as it were, 24/7. The stimulus of such a varied and constant flow of information has had an impact on humanity with some arguing that that can be seen in the decreasing attention spans of newer and current generations alike, as well as in their clear and rapidly changing habits of receiving and processing information, and communicating and interacting with others. Analyzing and understanding the impact of information and media in modern times is, however, not just a challenge for historians. Consider, for example, journalist Edward R. Murrow who delivered his famous “wires and lights in a box” speech back in 1958. In it, Mur-row argued that television did indeed present a great opportunity at the time, although it
2 As seen in: (2017, June 19). ERC abre processo de averiguações sobre a cobertura jornalística dos
acontecimentos em Pedrogão Grande. Retrieved from:
www.erc.pt/pt/noticias/erc-abre-processo-de-averiguacoes-sobre-a-cobertura-jornalistica-dos-acontecimentos-em-pedrogao-grande .
3
Translated from the original: “[…] [N]enhuma época viu, como a nossa, o seu presente ser vivido de um modo já tão carregado de sentido «histórico».” Nora, P., 1973, Fazer História – Volume 1, p. 243.
also, and more importantly, came with an added responsibility for journalism:
It is not necessary to remind you of the fact that your voice, amplified to the degree where it reaches from one end of the country to the other, does not confer upon you greater wisdom than when your voice reached only from one end of the bar to the other. […] [T]his instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and even it can inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise, it's nothing but wires and lights in a box. There is a great and perhaps decisi-ve battle to be fought against ignorance, intolerance and indifference.4 ExercisingpowerwithoutresponsibilityisMurrow’swarningtofuturejournalists, since his remarks show the need to use the new(s) media wisely. Interestingly enough, it is possible to extend this speech’s implication to today’s computers, cell phones and tablets. While the box and the wires have become increasingly smaller, the lights shine brighter than ever in these technological and revolutionary tools. Through live broadcasts and streaming, the internet and news alerts of today may use different means to reach these different screens, but it still faces that very same struggle in this troubled start of the 21st century. And if television could once afford to be more meticulous and calculated in its approach, due to the fact that only some shows had air time and only few channels existed, the same could not be said today about the Internet. Which is why one must ask the pressing question: what can journalism (truly) do to inform its audiences and to assert its responsibly in this new age of mass and instantaneous media? Can it be the voice of reason among the confusing white noise that oftentimes ensues online? If it was so, then information online would be shared reasonably, fact-checked and well reported. But journalism is, in fact, sometimes part of the problem. In such a medium where one can readily receive and share information, journalism could indeed work better at being the voice of reason in these electronic miasmas. And yet, oftentimes, online journalism resorts to “click-bait articles” and “listicles”, further tarnishing its image and discrediting its rightful role as a reputable information provider. What will become of journalism? Will it change completely to the point of becoming unrecognizable? It is reasonable to argue that it already has, since a quick
4 This excerpt was taken from the October 15, 1958, "wires and lights in a box" address by the veteran
broadcaster Edward R. Murrow who delivered his famous speech before attendees of the RTDNA (then RTNDA) convention.
glance at 19th century journalism reveals how news delivery and information providers have changed significantly. The same can even be said about journalism practiced at the end of the 20th century, since no one could have anticipated the rise and impact of personal computers and cell phones for modern communication. Journalism today struggles to safeguard its continuing relevance and importance with many publications opting to explore newer ways to hold their audience’s attention. Interestingly enough, long-form and investigate written journalism continue to find its place, even online, with the added benefit that this medium offers newer and more interactive tools something that newspaper or television could never truly have benefited from. But in order to ensure their survival these formats, which tend to be longer, do seem to struggle in such frantic times. It is not enough for journalism to offer good reporting; there also needs to be something more, perhaps a voice of reason with the journalist and author as part of such a struggle. As journalist Leila Guerriero points out in her interview for the Brazilian edition of El País: “With effort and commitment, you can find places to publish longer things. A longer text does not mean that it is good. In addition to being long, it needs to be good.”5
While this study will not try and answer that increasingly pressing and unanswerable question – How will journalism survive/adapt in the 21st century? – it will, however, address long-form journalism and its place, or lack thereof, in past and current media; with a heavy focus on Portugal, and predominantly through a structural analysis of what some call literary journalism/reportage. This investigation hopes to further the discussion upon this genre, which its author initiated in his Master’s thesis in 2013, while at the same time introducing a literary analysis in order to further explore this genre. This analysis will be done through an initial deconstruct of journalism and afterwards a study of literary journalism’s place in it. Then it will thus consider an analysis of this genre’s narrative side through two distinct categories of literature in order to test their validity within it. Only after addressing these two approaches can this study then focus on the Portuguese reality of this genre.
Inthepresentstudy,onewillthennotonlyexpandupontheanalysissurrounding this genre’s place in Portugal throughout the 20th century but also establish a direct
5 Translated from the original: “Com esforço e empenho se encontram lugares para publicar coisas mais
longas. Um texto extenso tampouco implica que seja bom. Além de longo, precisa ser bom.” Mendonça, H., (2017, July 29). Leila Guerriero: “Não creio na objectividade jornalística e sim na subjectividade
logue with varied Portuguese literary journalists in hopes of better understanding their insights on their craft and their vision on the present and future of this genre in today’s media. To open room for discussion, one must first consider literary journalism’s room within journalism itself, which is why the first chapter of this study will focus on analy-zing this concept. Only by reaching a consensus of what journalism is can this study then being to understand why (and if) these longer and more investigative formats conti-nue to be relevant today. In a time where the celerity of both distributing and receiving information is valued, one must question if long-form investigative journalism can con-tinue to contribute to enrich the much needed democratic dialogue in our current times.
The second chapter of this study will then analyze in detail this genre, which we call literary journalism, by focusing on some of the many literary components of this genre and examining why it is, according to some, seen as a sort of “hybrid” genre, considered simultaneously as being literature and journalism. In order to further understand the implications of this possibility we will analyze some of literature’s particular elements – namely the concept of plot and hero – and compare them with several works of literary journalism. Through this analysis we will then be able to better assert this genre’s place among current Portuguese media. To achieve this it is important to first briefly consider its development throughout the 20th century in order to better position its evolution amidst the Portuguese political-social landscape and to explore how this century affected the development and growth of literary journalism.
And, finally, in the third chapter we will establish a dialogue with four different Portuguese journalists by addressing their crafts and sharing their points of view on current journalistic struggles. The objective of these interviews will be to voice the journalist’s view on their choices and their insights. The four interviews were conducted in person and approached in a qualitative methodology, with their structures and questions – as we hope to show – based on previous studies of literary journalism. The full transcript of each of these four interviews, in both their original Portuguese and their English translation, can be found in the annexes of this thesis. This study will then conclude with an analysis of the genre and its possible future in the 21st century.
Before beginning we should, however, assert a few caveats in order to better delineate the structure of this study and justify its approach. First, this study is not meant to be an encyclopedia of the genre of literary journalism in Portugal, nor is it intended to be a study on the purpose or reasoning behind journalistic approaches to the
craft. Rather, this study hopes to be an analysis of a particular journalistic type of narrative, one that traverses the traditional frontiers of journalism and literature and that is voiced and anchored by journalists whose writing styles and viewpoints on journalism deserve to be approached and studied further. At the same time, since there is a need to consider the national and international academia alike, the thesis is presented wholesomely in one single language. This means that any quotes that were in a different language were thus translated to English by the author (the footnotes will include the original version that was found of said quote, when it is the case).
Second, this study will refer to this genre as “literary journalism”, though its current moniker, it should be pointed out, has been at the center of academic debate for decades, a debate which has grown increasing virulent these past few years as it widens on a global scale. The reasoning behind calling it literary journalism or something else – or how this genre can be defined – will be further approached in this investigation. At this introductory moment, however, it should be said that, although this study will call this genre literary journalism in the following pages, it is not the position of this investigation to necessarily disagree with the use of other terms to describe or define this genre – terms such as literary reportage or narrative journalism, for example. In fact, a strong argument could be made, and will be addressed here, to show how some terms seem more reasonable and solid than others when referring to this genre.
Finally, this study includes in it the full transcript of the responses provided in the four conducted interviews (which can be found in Annex 1 in their translated version and Annex 2 in their original version). Due to the fact that the subject of analysis is quite distinct in itself, the methodology behind their structure and subsequent analysis follows a semistandardized approach for scientific study. The data was approached qualitatively with a focus in narrative analysis, first developing research queries which centered on a script of questions based on similar structures found in renowned academic books on literary journalism. Then the raw data was fully transcribed, organized and interpreted, mainly in the third chapter and through textual comparison. The approach to this data was heavily influenced by a desire to let the journalists talk about their own experiences and provide stories related to their respective crafts which, coincidentally, opened up room for great insights on, their writing and the particularities that reflect the eclectic nature and understanding of literary journalism.
Chapter 1 – Communication, Literature and Journalism: Connections and Crossroads
1.1. – Concerning Journalism: Functions, Possibilities and Roles
If you are the kind of person who, once you have found out something, find that you are not satisfied about knowing it until you figure out a way to tell somebody else,
then you're a journalist. Ray Suarez
In the 1986 nonfiction movie Salvador we follow the troubled story of real life photojournalist Richard Boyle, during his time covering the civil war in El Salvador, a catastrophic conflict that lasted from 1979 until 1992. In one particular scene, Boyle and his colleague John Cassidy (vaguely based on real life war photographer John Hoagland) are both covering one of the bloodiest moments of the conflict. Each “armed” with a Nikon FE photographic camera, they run around amongst the soldiers and the flying bullets, capturing through their lenses the ensuing cruelty and destruction with nothing stopping their resolve. Suddenly, one of the soldiers stops the photojournalists on their tracks and points his weapon towards them. As he is ready to fire both journalists quickly shout: “Periodistas! Periodistas!” – “Journalists! Journalists!” After hearing this the soldier lowers his weapon and lets them pass. The photojournalists quickly resume their jobs and continue to run around impervious to the explosions and destruction that continues to ensue, almost as if there is an implicit agreement, from both sides of the conflict, that no one should upon fire these non- -combatants since they are apparently protected from any armed retaliation if they say they are journalists. And so, when later another soldier draws his weapon towards the photojournalists we assume that their safety is yet again confirmed. However, after hearing them say yet again that they are journalists, this second soldier decides to ask a follow up question: “De que país?” – “From what country?”6
6
This segment can be seen in: Stone, O. (Director). (1986). Salvador [Motion Picture] United States: Hemdale Film Corporation.
This moment, that is extremely cinematographic on a movie known as being only loosely based in real albeit fictionalized moments,7 seems to suggest that although both journalists are completely wrapped in a violent conflict, they can still act in an innocuous way without interfering or influencing what they witness, while they capture the scenery through the good use of their technological observation.8 This scene seems to portray a reality in which the journalistic practice and existence is allowed, even in war times (or one would hope so), although ironically it still requires knowing the country of origin of said journalists basically giving the idea that the outcome of an encounter with an armed fighter changes depending on the reporter’s country of origin. Unfortunately, facts show us that in reality journalists are indeed not protected by the Geneva Convention and, as the years pass, the number of journalists’ casualties in armed conflicts has risen significantly.9 As such, Stone’s cinematographic moment should be regarded merely as a romanticized and hopeful version of reality.
Still, this moment seems more than fitting for us to start to contemplate the ques-tion that will occupy most of the first chapter of this investigaques-tion, which is: What is journalism? The question seems pretty straightforward and easy to answer. A contem-porary citizen from a democratic society undoubtedly has contact with journalism on a daily basis, perhaps in paper form, online or even in alerts in their own social media newsfeed (each format suffering from several handicaps). One could even say that modern societies are constantly in contact with journalism and they do so in a quiet and civilized manner, giving it for granted in their own lives. But, does that mean that one is able to define journalism in simple terms? Maybe it is easier to do so when we consider yet another question, such as: What is a journalist? Pointing to a concept does not mean
7 As seen in: Tunzelmann, A. V. (2009, April 9). Salvador: Oliver Stone, lose the fast and loose
approach. Retrieved from: www.theguardian.com/film/2009/apr/08/salvador-oliver-stone .
8 The idea mentioned here of technological observation should be perceived as a loose adaptation of the
scientific term known as the observer effect, the idea that the act of observing a phenomenon will produce changes on what is being observed. The observer effect also states that the changes produced in said phenomenon, through the act of observing, can be reduced by the usage of better and more developed instruments. One could wonder if the photojournalists in the movie Salvador (1986) affected the ensuing conflict not necessarily due to their instruments – their cameras – but due to their physical presence. If they captured the event through drone footage, for example, their presence would be less conspicuous and therefore less intrusive. Their physicality, that is, their existence in that time and place was what drew the soldiers to question their motives and therefore to point their weapons to these innocent and hopefully impartial individuals who “interacted” with the scenery through a camera lens. Considering the observer
effect in journalism would certainly bring this study towards a spiral on interesting ideas which, sadly, are
not the main focus of this investigation and therefore will be put aside for the moment being.
9 The subject of the rising casualties of journalists for the past century was thoroughly explored in the 9º
SOPCOM Congress on November 12, 2015; especially in Linda Steiner’s panel titled: Who can do What with New Media Technologies: The Potential for Citizen Witnesses to Report on Conflict.
that one understands it, and while one might believe to know what is the concept of journalism and journalist, since when thinking about them an image arises in our mind; the fact is that a further analysis might prove otherwise (since pointing to an example of something or picturing it in our head does not prove that we have knowledge and understanding of what it is but that we merely, or at least, have “a” representation of it). Phillipe Gaillard addresses the definition of journalist in the following manner:
A journalist is defined, in general, by the following tautology: “The one that devotes most of its activity towards the practice of journalism and gainsmost of its income from it.” An unsatisfactory answer, perhaps, but more exact than the one given by Petit Larousse: “Person who writes in a newspaper.”10
After examining this quote for a brief moment one might immediately conclude that he/she is still no closer to truly defining what a journalist is, in modest and undispu-table terms. What about considering a simpler and more straightforward definition? A common dictionary defines journalism as the following: “1. Profession or journalistic activity; 2. Periodical printing; 3. Group of journalists.”11 And the word journalist is defined in a Dictionary as: “1. Person whose job is writing in periodicals; 2. Person whose profession belongs to the subject of information […] on written periodical publi-cation or on the television, on the radio, on the Internet.”12 Although both definitions are solid, in their own way, they both deserve pressing commentary and overall revision.
First of all, as time passes journalism moves further and further away from that traditional idea of “periodical printing”, as in frequent of even seasonal in its printed release. There are more and more journalistic works that do not obey to a clear and periodical release and there are more and more articles and news reports that are not printed but are actually directly uploaded onto the Internet. More often than not journalism is found in book form or even in TV documentaries or podcasts instead of its
10 Translated from the original: “O jornalista é definido, em geral, por uma tautologia: ‘O que consagra a
maior parte da sua actividade ao exercício do jornalismo e dele tira a maior parte dos seus proventos.’ Definição pouco satisfatória, talvez, mas mais exacta que a do Petit Larousse: ‘Pessoa que escreve num jornal.’” Gaillard, P., 1971, O Jornalismo, p. 15.
11 Translated from the original: “1. Profissão ou actividade de jornalista; 2. Imprensa periódica; 3.
Conjunto de jornalistas.” Dicionário Priberam da Língua Portuguesa. (2008- ). Definition of the word:
journalism. Retrieved from: www.priberam.pt/dlpo/jornalismo .
12 Translated from the original: “1. Pessoa que tem por profissão escrever em periódicos; 2. Pessoa que
tem por profissão trabalhar no domínio da informação […] numa publicação periódica escrita ou na televisão, na rádio, na Internet.” Dicionário Priberam da Língua Portuguesa. (2008-). Definition of the
classic printed format, and its release schedule can actually be quite irregular without conveying to any apparent order. This, without a doubt, should be enough to eliminate that idea of journalism as a “continuing publication”, as this definition seemed to entail.
On the other hand, we should also acknowledge that many of the contents published in Internet news outlets or in newspapers are in fact not written by professional journalists. They might be primarily investigated by journalists but that does not mean that all news are written by certified and professional journalists, not now when the Internet is filled with news aggregator websites. This much is true but if for whatever reason someone disagrees with this statement, arguing that it would be reasonable to label everyone who works on a newspaper as a journalist, then one should also call the computer technician and the cleaning personnel as journalists since they also spend quite some time in the newsroom and they are indispensable employees to its success. Therefore, defining journalists with this idea of “journalistic activity” or those “who work on a newspaper” is not at all a valid and reasonable option since not all who work or write in a newspaper have a journalistic profession as is seen, for example, by the many column writers, chronicles and opinion articles found in many journalistic publications. In Portugal, for example, there is the work register booklet for journalists, a professional requirement which allows us to immediately distinguish between professional journalists and non-journalists.
Furthermore, one could say that those whose “profession belongs to the subject of information” tend to be journalists, but then again that is not absolutely true. Maybe the problem is with word “belong” which seems to be quite abstract and vague in this context. But even if this definition was to be considered as “correct” or even “enough as it is” for this definition, one would still be far from truly understanding it since nowadays it is reasonable to find journalism in a number of substantial and different formats, which requires further analysis and discussion. For example, the format called citizen journalism is, more than often, created by individuals with no journalistic career and sometimes even with no previous experience whatsoever in the communication area. These individuals/citizens contribute to informative publications with photographs, films, audio and/or narrative contents about particular events; and sometimes the result is in fact indistinguishable from other de facto journalistic productions.
What are then the implications of such newer formats towards a modern and entailing definition of journalism? For that matter, can one in fact acknowledge a format
like citizen journalism to be indeed journalism? Almost immediately one could criticize this particular journalistic format for its obvious lack of legitimacy and assertiveness in its working of sources, facts and overall contents; with no insurance of a formal and structured work-ethic (like the one seen in most of main stream media). And yet, the growing popularity and relevance of such a genre13 undoubtedly played an important part in past events (on this subject, take into account the Brazilian Mídia Ninja14), in fact, this format continues to be relevant in contemporary times (on this subject, let us consider the important role that it still plays in today’s conflict in Syria15). Although there is still a legitimate critique of the seriousness and ethics concerning citizen journalism, one cannot in good conscience put such a journalistic format (and many other) aside when contemplating a modern definition of journalism. It is obviously possible to argue that because it is still quite a modern phenomenon and its impact cannot be predicted in a mid or long-term basis, that it would not be wise to consider the implications of such a genre towards this definition. And yet, it is undeniable that its existence only proves us that it is not easy to find a solid definition for journalism.
For the sake of argument, let us examine again that premise that those who write for newspapers are journalists and let us forget for now that clearly flawed argument, approached before, that stated that those who work in newspaper are journalists. If this premise is correct, then what could be said about the many renowned Portuguese journalists, for example, who are now mostly remembered as writers but who once worked as journalists? Let us contemplate the 19th century when Portuguese authors like
13
On the importance of citizen journalism, let us consider Alex S. Jones when he points out that: “Citizen journalism takes place when soldiers post from Iraq, or when people caught in New Orleans during Katrina post firsthand accounts of the mayhem and also post photographs taken on the spot. Twitter is now a news vehicle in that its ultrashort electronic posts – or tweets – can carry information – though not much of it. It is citizen journalism when a nonjournalist with expertise in a given field posts something on a news site that reflects his special knowledge. […] To my dismay, such material often has more credibility and is of greater interest to readers than what is produced by professionals.” Jones, A. S., 2009,
Losing the News, p. 190.
14
Interestingly enough, Portuguese journalist Alexandra Lucas Coelho in the Conference O Regresso do
Journalism on November 9, 2013, was asked about her opinion on the rise of the citizen journalism group Midia Ninja in Brazil. She mentioned that such a group gained “sucesso que teve pelo fracasso dos
media” – “success due to the failure of [mainstream] media”. On the subject, she mentioned the example of Brazilian TV channel Globo, that accompanied many of the protests back in 2013 by helicopter, which meant that they were not on the ground speaking directly with those involved, like Midia Ninja was. However, when Alexandra was later questioned if she considered this group’s actions as journalism, she answered “não se trata de jornalismo” – “it is not journalism” and she agreed with the idea that “não po-demos chamar à sua produção de jornalismo, mas sim de informação” – “we cannot call their work as jo-urnalism, but we should call it information”. On the subject of the evolution and development of said gro-up, one should also consider: Watts, J. (2013, August 29). Brazil’s ninja reporters spread stories from the
streets. Retrieved from: www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/29/brazil-ninja-reporters-stories-streets .
15
For more on this subject, consider: Platt, E. (2014, October 9). Citizen Journalists Playing a Crucial
Eça de Queirós wrote for newspapers. Although Eça was already a great writer when he further pursued journalism, we know now that he actually fictionalized many moments in his journalistic narratives.16 He was clearly not concern with journalistic professional values to guide his ethics towards truth and honesty in journalism. But then again, were there such a thing like “journalistic values” back then? Were his colleagues in other journalistic publications any different at the time? A modern definition of journalism needs to be aware that journalism itself has changed a lot since its inception and that this craft, for all its value and importance, has a rather small and impetuous existence. And yet, one does not need to go all the way back to the 19th century to understand the frailty behind the argument that those who write for newspapers are journalists. A quick look at many contemporary newspapers and one quickly find pages filled with political commentary, guest critics invited to tackle a certain subject, and the many renowned columnists who are oftentimes a good reason in on itself to buy a newspaper. For these reasons and many others one can safely say that the previous approached definitions for journalism, mentioned in the past few paragraphs, are indeed inadequate and the search for a solid definition of such a complex and widespread subject is still, at this moment of this investigation, not within our grasp.
The matter of fact is that all of the previous arguments, displayed up until now, were merely expositive in their consideration and inquisitive in their nature. And yet, all of this undoubtedly proves us that although one comfortably co-exists with journalism on a daily basis that does not mean that it can be easily defined, given the circumstances. This, overall, is not necessarily negative since it confirms the suspicion that this is a complex subject that deserves to be approached with a constructive and laborious mindset. It is possible to assert, as previously alluded, that the definition of journalism or journalist is not something clear and simple, nor was it at any time ever since its inception and, because of this, one should not find it strange that such a definition is still eluding us at this point of this investigation. In fact, one can agree with Conboy’s stated assertion that when bearing this subject in mind:
16 In an article by Isabel Soares we can clearly see how the author Eça de Queirós has a personal and
practical detachment from some of his journalistic articles, giving us the sense that there was clearly no process of journalistic verification, amongst other elements that tend to define the profession. As Soares explains: “[…] [Eça de Queirós] he added, created entire scenes, and narrated telling episodes of events he had observed. And as a story unfolded, Queirós gave his personal opinion and his own interpretation of the facts that he was narrating to the public back in Portugal. […] [S]omething unthinkable (and unprintable), for instance, in the factual reports of war correspondents.” Soares, I., 2011, “Literary Journalism’s Magnetic Pull: Britain’s ‘New’ Journalism and the Portuguese at the Fin-de Siècle”, in
[…] [T]here is not and never has been a single unifying activity to be thought of as journalism. On the contrary, journalism has always been as-sociated with dispute – dispute about its value, its role, its direction, even its definition – and journalism has always been constructed as a diverse and multiple set of textual strategies, differing practices attempting to champion or challenge whatever has been the dominant version.17
Having said that, is it then possible to ponder with precision and clarity on that which is called journalism or is this a lost cause and this study should call the whole thing off? It is justifiable to mention that even though the search for such a definition is not at all the main focal purpose of this study, the fact is that it would be unwise to approach the principle subject of this investigation – literary journalism – without being able to define/clarify the genre that mainly gave birth to it. Although the argument that has been put forward up until now has been admittedly quite rhetoric and simplistic in its approach, it still serves the purpose to be a short introduction to the study that will follow. To reach a solid and clear definition for journalism will not be an easy task, but for the whole first chapter of this investigation this subject will be addressed with careful consideration and astute observation in search of such an explanation. However the many difficult challenges that such an endeavour will entail, one is still and always reminded of Nelson Traquina’s words: “It is absurd to think that we can answer the question ‘What is journalism?’ in a single phrase, or even on a book. But let us be brave and let us try.”18
To truly approach this question that will occupy this first chapter let us start off by considering an historical analysis.
17 Conboy, M., 2004, Journalism: A Critical History, p. 3.
18 Translated from the original: “É absurdo pensar que possamos responder à pergunta «O que é o
jornalismo?» numa frase, ou até mesmo num livro. Mas sejamos corajosos e tentemos.” Traquina, N., 2005, Teorias do Jornalismo, porque as notícias são como são, p. 19.
1.1.1. – Humankind and the Origins of News
The speed of communications is wondrous to behold. Itisalsotrue thatspeedcanmultiplythedistributionofinformationthatweknowto beuntrue.
Edward R. Murrow
Between 492 to 490 BC occurred what would be known as the First Persian invasion of Greece, as retribution against the cities of Athens and Ereteria who had supported the city revolt of Ionia against Persian rule. The conflict would end in an important victory for Athenians on The Battle of Marathon. However, legend says that before the final battle the citizens of Athens feared the worst since it was told that if the Persian Empire were to be successful on the coming fight, they would surely destroy the city, killing all those who would oppose them and enslaving the rest of the survivors that inhabited Athens. Fearing that some Athenians might commit suicide or even set the city on fire in a panic attempt to prevent it from being looted, it was agreed that after the conflict a soldier would be sent back to Athens to bring news about the outcome of the battle: either victory or loss. This soldier, legend says, was called Pheidippides and after the battle it is said that he ran without stop from the city of Marathon, where the battle was fought, until he reached Athens with the news. The long distance, estimated to be over 35 km, tired the poor Pheidippides so much that after he finally reached the Athens Assembly he had only enough strength to share the message “We have won!” and afterwards immediately died from tiredness and exhaustion.
On the truth or lack of it concerning this old legend, or why the poor Pheidippi-des was not given a horse or two to make his journey easier; still the story survives and it deserves further analysis. In all stories, especially this one that is doubly millennial, there is always room for hyperbole and fiction, and yet that does not mean that we sho-uld not disdain this legend on its value, originality and clear symbolism. In fact, this sto-ry in particular inspired the Olympic event which is known today as the marathon race, a harsh test on the limits of human physicality that continues to celebrate those who thrive on controlling their mind over body. Still, what if this story had inspired somet-hing else? What if the story of this messenger-soldier, known most of the times only has the marathon soldier; what if his actions could mean more for the archives of history?
On a merely hypothetical perspective, why not ask the impeding question: if in medicine there is a Hippocratic Oath, why not have a Pheidippides Oath? If the Hippocratic Oath is still in use today, altered slightly to adapt to current times, perhaps we could do the same with Pheidippides story. Perhaps the Pheidippides Oath could focus not on the process of running for several kilometres but more on the fact that Pheidippides sacrificed himself to bring to society the thing they needed most: news, impartial and accurate. It would not be that absurd to contemplate this figure as a mythological inspiration for the practice of journalism, considering the poetic heroism and sacrifice that this story represents and the journey to bring clarity to obscurity. In fact, this story portrays almost perfectly – or so the legend says – the tale of an individual that, with all his might and strength, faced various adversities to bring out the facts to those that needed it in order to ensure their safety. Either forced by his leaders or not – we are not aware if Pheidippides ran out of his free will or not – this legendary messenger brought the news to where they were most needed and, by doing so, he informed his own society making it more capable to challenge the adversities that would threatened their own existence without said information. Is this not, apart from all the poetry, what one can perceive as the beginnings of journalism?
Although, when we ponder on this episode a little further, we can quickly find some contradictions. For instance, Pheidippides was nothing more than a messenger, he probably did not even chose how to address his message and he most definitely did not do any reporting on the subject. His job was merely to deliver the message, the much needed information, just like any mail man does with a physical letter or an electronic device nowadays, that is used to send a virtual message. We should point out that this does not mean that Pheidippides should not be contemplated as a hero or regarded with admiration. In fact, finding ingenious ways to deliver messages in war times is until this day a common and noteworthy practice. Pheidippides’ job, however like many other message runners in history, was to be a means to an end – a much needed vehicle – and nothing more. Throughout history there have always been important messengers, most of them anonymous to us and some of them surely brought more important messages than this soldier of Marathon. Perhaps they were even more gifted orally and intellectually, sometimes being chosen for the job due to their verbosity and power of observation. Still, we celebrate Pheidippides because in his heroic sacrifice, since he was successful in bringing the much needed information. And while this old tale is not
necessarily the most solid starting point to a study on journalism, it does however guide us towards an interesting path for this investigation while we ponder on the meaning of information. For the time being, however, let us continue this research by considering yet again history and myth.
In Ancient Greece it is said that amongst the many gods there was one called Pheme (or Fama – Fame, in its roman equivalent). There are some who argue that she was the daughter of Gaia (Earth) although others argue that she was actually the daughter of Elpis (Hope). Either way, her legend is indeed curious: it is said that she had a large number of eyes and mouths, she moved around with great speed and she lived in “[…] a sonant palace, with a thousand openings where all voices would enter, even the soft-spoken ones […].”19 It would seem that Pheme even had an altar in the city of Athens (in Ancient Greece it was one of the most – if not the most – powerful city state) and this city was, we should add, the epicentre (although with its many flaws20) that wo-uldgiveorigintowhatweknowtobethefirstformsofDemocracy.Thisgoddesswould often, legend says, “[…] return the words that reached her, amplifying them.”21
God-dess Pheme had this strange habit of, after hearing something said by mortals, to imme-diately repeat everything she had just heard. She would start by repeating once in a low voice – like a whisper – and then again and again, louder and louder until everyone he-ard her words. This is why Pheme is also remembered by a word that seems to suit her best, that is: rumour. Which is probably why it is said that Pheme was surrounded by many other things, such as: “[…] Credulity, by Error, by False Joy, by Terror, by Sediti-onandbyFalseRumoursand,fromherpalace,shewouldlookuponthewholeworld.”22 Taking into account for a brief moment this mythological figure, one could argue that we can feel a certain affinity for her: Pheme is either the daughter of the figure of Earth or Hope, she was worshipped in the city that gave birth to Democracy, she is known to spread and develop communication and, to top it all off, she shares the
19 Translated from the original: “[…] [P]alácio sonoro, com mil aberturas por onde penetra(va)m todas as
vozes, mesmo as mais baixas […].” Grimal, P., 1999, Dicionário da Mitologia Grega e Romana, p. 165.
20
Greek Democracy, as Bernard Crick (2002) explains, had many flaws at the time of its conception which would put at risk the common good in detriment of the good of the minority; that is, the powerful. On this subject, let us consider the following explanation which states that: “The claim to have the rule of the wise and the experienced in the business of government had obvious flaws. […] [T]oo often degenerated into either oligarchy, the rule of the powerful, or plutocracy, the rule of the rich.” Crick, B., 2002, A Very Short Introduction, p. 17.
21 Translated from the original: “[…] [D]evolvia as palavras que lhe chegam, ampliando-as.” Grimal, P.,
1999, p. 165.
22
Translated from the original: “[…] Credulidade, pelo Erro, pela Falsa Alegria, pelo Terror, pela Sedição e pelos Falsos Rumores e, do seu palácio, vigia(va) o mundo inteiro.” Ibidem.
knowledge that was once known only by a minority (putting at risk, at least in theory, the secrecy of information that once belonged only to a selected few). And yet, a further consideration for this character presents some clear red flags as there are clearly many ethical dilemmas that come from contemplating the implications of this mythological figure. The problem with what we perceive as rumour is that the final message runs the risk of being quite distant from the original – just like the children’s game known as “Broken Telephone”23
– and, we should point out, that not all secrets said softly should be revealed without any mediators, filters, analysis and/or precaution. Mythology apart we should add that although there is no need to find a goddess to personify journalism, there is still in this figure some interesting poetry and it is indeed quite a starting point to theoretically consider journalism further.
In fact, the origins of sharing and communicating the news, as a subject of gene-ral interest, is said to have taken place as far back as the old forums of Ancient Greece where often individuals would share the news to an audience of Greek citizens and members of other social statures. There are also reports that this tradition would conti-nue along during the Roman Empire. This practice is obviously far from what we per-ceive as journalism and one can easily guess that although many of this news were met with enthusiasm and expectation, there were also others who received them with some justifiable incredulity and uncertainty. It was without a doubt very difficult to prove or disprove the legitimacy of the news being shared as there was always the clear possibi-lity that they were actually far from the truth or, even at times, adulterated information propagated only to profit the richest throughout the Greek and later the Roman Empire.
Taking into account the fragility of this simple “beginnings” for news and news-sharing as a whole, we could argue that such a tradition faced risk of extincti-on (at least in the western world) with the coming fall of the Roman Empire of the West and that the coming medieval kingdoms had no interest on reinstating this more “civilized prac-tice”. A lot is often said on the social, political and military kickback that was imposed by the many tribes that would rule over Europe on what is called by some as the Dark Ages. And yet, we can acknowledge that the exercise of sharing the news at public forums, as a common practice (even if it happened only in larger cities), would indeed
23 Broken telephone – or just telephone – is a kid’s game where a person whispers an elaborate message
of several words another person’s ear which then whispers the same message to another person and again and again until the last player announces the message to the entire group. What often happens is that the final message said out loud is completely different from the original, proving the unreliability of human recollection and communication.
suffer large challenges and event setbacks during these times. Still, we also know today that these tribes and kingdoms, as was as the practice of many of the first organized communities, had the natural habit of questioning strangers in order to learn news from other places and distant lands, other societies and other realities where these travellers had been. It is therefore not strange that such a curiosity for information would reach so-me odd and unusual circumstances during these tiso-mes, many profiting from such prac-tice. In fact, it is said that Portugal, for example, had what was called as novidadeiros profissionais – professional novelties, which constituted as a number of individuals that were known to tell the news of the kingdom, to anyone who would indulge them.24
When cities became bigger and more organized, naturally so did governmental power which became more concentrated in a small minority, oftentimes constituted by lords, clerics and king. This centralized power obviously came with a need of constant awareness on the events and news from controlled territories but also from neighbouring villages. News from distant lands, sometimes first originating through stories or rumours, was beneficial to secure governmental power and therefore a commodity that could not be dispensable. As time passed news became something more and more valuable but also continuously and naturally met with some incredulity, especially if it challenged what was perceived as common and/or popular knowledge.
Overall, what does all of this signify for this study? Well, hopefully it helps us understand that it is impossible to reach an initial moment for news-sharing and the search for the recognition or explanation on the origin of the first forms of journalism will not necessarily help us find a definite solution for that question: what is journalism? If that much is true, then why should we continue in this pursuit on historical grounds? The fact is that there are certainly many volumes on the History of Journalism that can, in a way, catapult this investigation towards new grounds. And, perhaps it would be wise to continue this study in a progressive and critical analysis of said “knowledge”, not necessarily taking it for granted but by analysing it with an inquisitive attitude. To do this, it would be interesting to transfigure Hans R. Jauss argument on literary theory, and apply it towards an assertion of journalism. In Jauss’ viewpoint, we should consider a subject “[…] from the position that it occupies in the evolution of a genre […]” but we should also approach this through other topics of
24
The subject of novidadeiros profissionais is further explored in the following: Godinho, J., 2009, As
understanding, such as those of “[…] reception, its provoked influence and recognized value to prosperity.”25
By acknowledging this, it would seem then that by studying the evolution of journalism through its history and reception, we would then be closer to understanding not only its value, but it would also take us towards a more insightful and reasonable definition of said genre. To do this, we should perhaps approach journalism by considering what elements greatly contributed for its development and proliferation throughout the ages. To consider such elements they would have to share some of the major responsibility for journalism’s dissemination and success in terms of communication in a larger scale and, later on, the same elements would have to be accountable for the success and viability of journalism. To ponder on these subjects no element seems more fitting than the matter of technology through innovation, since communication and newsgathering would never reach its current status without its cleverness in utilizing humankind’s greatest inventions.
Onecouldhardlydisagreewiththestatementthatmuchofman’sevolutionisun- deniably linked with its logical, reproducible and continuing development through tech-nical innovation. In fact, by trying to better understand the evolution of news through technology, we might be able to bring this investigation towards a better perspective on the origin of news outlets and journalism’s current state of affairs. Through a mere ana-lysis of journalism’s recent history one could hardly disagree that technology is one of the major players in the significant changes that this genre as known across the years. Internet, for example, has changed journalism forever, just as television and radio befo-re it and through these and others innovations we find that technical befo-revolutions conti-nuously alter the current media paradigm. Leaving behind a time where knowledge was mostly shared through stories told from one generation to another, humankind found ro-om for expansion through different inventions and practices. Frro-om language to writing, from printed paper to the telegraph, from radio to television, to our present where the di-gital world travelled from stationary large and awkward computers to being small and in our pockets at all times; all of these moments in history changed mankind and contribu-ted to the creation, advancement and eventual assertion of journalism as we know it.
25 Translated from the original: “[…] [P]osição que ocupa na evolução de um género […]” &“[…] da
recepção, da influência provocada e valor reconhecido pela posteridade.” Jauss, H. R., 2003, A Literatura
It would seem then that an understanding of this subject should take this into further attention. Consequently and in search of a relevant view on these matters, we will know contemplate Alex S. Jones on what he calls the theory of the four epochs. This theory contemplates man’s evolution through four major technological innovations which, in their own way, played a part in humankind’s ever-changing and evolving social dynamics. But, we should add, each of these epochs also gave way to the development and impact of news as an underlying part of humanities existence and knowledge in contemporary times. In order to further approach all of these ideas we will now start by analysing the first three epochs (since the author points out that we are now on the threshold of the fourth epoch26) while we explore the reasoning behind each one and the clear impact they brought to humankind and to news in general.
Therefore, if these epochs are connected with significant technological advance-ment, then one would not be surprised to learn that the first epoch, considered by Alex S. Jones, is in fact connected with the beginnings of human language (roughly 50,000 years ago27). We could argue that language is not necessarily a technology but the fact is that the development of all technologies are connected with some form of language and, if it in itself cannot be called a technology (although some argue that it can), then we could surely call it a technique. Language would quickly give way to expressing organized and more complex thoughts; and challenging tasks that required multiple individuals to perform were now made easy. Through the structural development of life in society, man found another important tool in this first epoch, a tool that would allow humankind to register its ideas, concepts and stories into something more solid and consistent. This new tool made stories capable of lasting much longer that human memory and life itself, surviving for generations to come. It was in this first epoch that man created the first forms of writing (around 5,000 years ago28, or 7,000 if you take into account other systems of written language, which existed mainly in ancient China). This allowed for an exponential and unique progress for humankind. Perhaps this new technology could have given us a brighter and different present if not for the fragility of
26 As seen in: Jones, A. S., 2009, p. 128.
27 As the author explains: “Epoch I began at a time some scholars estimate to be 50,000 years ago and
some much further into the past. It was heralded by the invention of language – systematically applying meaning to sounds.” Ibidem.
28 On this subject the author points out that: “Knowledge beyond an alarmed squawk could now be passed
until the further technological advance of written language, which is thought to be a mere 5,000 years old. Written language allowed knowledge to be preserved intact and passed on to a person in another place or to succeeding generations.” Ibidem.
papyrus and paper, knowledge and science and all the other innovations that are subject to be forgotten and/or feared by the current paradigm.29
But although both inventions in history allowed for a substantial development for humankind, one cannot overlook the fact that updated, current and relevant information was still undeniably and invariably in the hands of a small minority.30 It was, according to Jones, in the next epoch that the changes really began. The new technology that would bring forth the second epoch was Johannes Gutenberg’s innovation, that is, the new developments for the printing process overcoming the already existent woodblock printing through the great advantages of the printing press in metal. This new method not only allowed for a better conservation of the printing materials but it also allowed for a quicker, cheaper and more precise printing method. Such a ground-breaking innovation led to an ever-growing spread and accessibility of the written word and with it knowledge and information. Although it was still in the hands of a minority, this new fundamental tool would give birth to the beginnings of the first formal forms of journalism. In fact, as Conboy explains:
Print reinforced the greater authority of the written over the spoken and took on some of the rhetoric of spoken language to better legitimize itself in terms of custom and practice (Ong, 1982). These cultural changes were to lead to greater demands from broader sections of society for access to information about political affairs and journalism would in time provide it.31
We should, however, acknowledge that a formal form of journalism did not be-gan with Gutenberg’s innovation in the 15th
century, but this new method did indeed al-low for a significant progress in the evolution of the diffusion and propagation of upda-ted information, effectively making it easier to reach a much wider public using a much cheaper and durable process, something never before seen in human history. Naturally, there were those who feared the ground-breaking invention, as Jones explains:
29 On this matter, one should remember the fire in Alexandria’s Library and the many books said to have
burned. Within the many scientific spoil lost is the work of Eratosthenes of Cyrene, an author that explored a number of significant and revolutionary advancements in the 3rd century B.C. From his several ground-breaking works, consider for example his almost perfect calculous of Earth’s diameter with rudimentary technology and his several contributions to the advancement of astronomy; centuries before there was even a common acceptance of the heliocentric theory.
30 As Jones points out: “Knowledge represented great power and was therefore reserved for the powerful
– royalty, the upper classes, and the priesthood.” Jones, A. S., 2009, p. 128.
