Academia vs Journalism
I was among those who are indecisive between choosing an academic path or a journalism career. Though I haven't completed this process ultimately, after trailers of both life styles, let me tell you my personal observations. Then you decide which one is more suitable for you.
Academia is about digging up deep knowledge, making connections between dots. Especially, today's academia is based on social fordism. Everyone is specializing in very narrow topics, titles of dissertations are lengthening day by day. You may find a literature about the role of entrepreneurs in decreasing the number of dolphins, or a paper titled "the importance of kitchen tools in shaping a community life in old Mesopotamia". Each of these studies is a drop in the ocean. But collectively, by very little contribution from each one, this all information mass may accumulate and become a meaningful whole, may constitute a big theory, a key to save the world, if not falsify each other. At least there is hope.
Turning to journalists, we have people who are trying to save the world every single day with same excitement but failing each time. Journalism is not about producing new theories, or making argumentations. It is about reflecting daily developments, and selling what the academia has already produced. They are the ones who produce the arguments, and journalists picks and open them to the public use. "A recent research revealed that" you can run across such phrases every day. Academics are the ones who are carrying out a research on the role of breastfeeding on mental development of kids for a whole year, and finally they find there is none. Then, journalists come and see, say "Well that counts, but it's not a big deal", publish in the 7th page and move on. Or if a journalist decided to dig up a topic and need empirical evidence, then some of studies are unearthed from the ivory tower of academia to the newspapers, TV channels or social media.
In this sense, media's role may not be counted as intellectual as the academia. Let's not pretend like we don’t know that journalism is seen as a brain-dead activity by some. Even journalists themselves sometimes underestimate their jobs. Well, it actually depends. If you're re-posting what you've seen in social media, or copying news from agencies and contribute nothing, then yes, you are transforming journalism to a brain dead, non-intellectual activity. But if you're making an investigation, for example, then you need to connect the different points and produce a story. If you are able to understand from sophisticated economic numbers published by big fancy international organizations, then you can make an analysis of them and bring it into the screen. If you're making an interview, you need to ask the right questions, channel the talk to a meaningful point. The key here is how you manage to transform the information laying under the ground while transferring it to the public use, rather than the content itself. That's all up to you, and it has nothing to do with the nature of journalism. Producing content like academicians may require intense intellectual effort, that’s true. But you can make the research part in journalism too. That’s why it is always possible to generate your own path in between.
Here is the advantage of SOAS: You're not lost at microeconomic theories or mathematical models about regressions. You have a plenty of applied classes and you can catch the latest discussions. You have the opportunity to make analyses of current problems facing in different regions. This is something you cannot find in other universities. You're at the university, but not stuck in the close market of theories, though this may give over-confidence to some students and made them think that they have a command of everything going on across the world.
Journalism also mean a life between impact and reaction, or challenge and response. It is more like a life-standing conflict, a fight you can never give up. If you give up, then you're simply out. On the other hand, you can find a more quiet and a happier life at universities. Of course there is a fight here too, and it's usually even a more ideological and a deeper one, but at least you can go to bed without thinking about it when everything settled down.
One practical difference I have to mention is the working hours. Academics can be completely off when they are out of the university, but journalists have no regular working hours, there is no such thing as being off. The life doesn't stop here. When some sleep in the Middle East, others in the US are announcing their plans about them. Or all of a sudden, in the midnight, you can hear a possible coup attempt and go out immediately, saying as a Turkish.
Overall, each profession has its own beauties and difficulties although they are greatly inter-dependent. It’s up to you to shape your profession. But don’t worry, you can jump from one to another, or create your own space in between.
Academia is about digging up deep knowledge, making connections between dots. Especially, today's academia is based on social fordism. Everyone is specializing in very narrow topics, titles of dissertations are lengthening day by day. You may find a literature about the role of entrepreneurs in decreasing the number of dolphins, or a paper titled "the importance of kitchen tools in shaping a community life in old Mesopotamia". Each of these studies is a drop in the ocean. But collectively, by very little contribution from each one, this all information mass may accumulate and become a meaningful whole, may constitute a big theory, a key to save the world, if not falsify each other. At least there is hope.
Turning to journalists, we have people who are trying to save the world every single day with same excitement but failing each time. Journalism is not about producing new theories, or making argumentations. It is about reflecting daily developments, and selling what the academia has already produced. They are the ones who produce the arguments, and journalists picks and open them to the public use. "A recent research revealed that" you can run across such phrases every day. Academics are the ones who are carrying out a research on the role of breastfeeding on mental development of kids for a whole year, and finally they find there is none. Then, journalists come and see, say "Well that counts, but it's not a big deal", publish in the 7th page and move on. Or if a journalist decided to dig up a topic and need empirical evidence, then some of studies are unearthed from the ivory tower of academia to the newspapers, TV channels or social media.
In this sense, media's role may not be counted as intellectual as the academia. Let's not pretend like we don’t know that journalism is seen as a brain-dead activity by some. Even journalists themselves sometimes underestimate their jobs. Well, it actually depends. If you're re-posting what you've seen in social media, or copying news from agencies and contribute nothing, then yes, you are transforming journalism to a brain dead, non-intellectual activity. But if you're making an investigation, for example, then you need to connect the different points and produce a story. If you are able to understand from sophisticated economic numbers published by big fancy international organizations, then you can make an analysis of them and bring it into the screen. If you're making an interview, you need to ask the right questions, channel the talk to a meaningful point. The key here is how you manage to transform the information laying under the ground while transferring it to the public use, rather than the content itself. That's all up to you, and it has nothing to do with the nature of journalism. Producing content like academicians may require intense intellectual effort, that’s true. But you can make the research part in journalism too. That’s why it is always possible to generate your own path in between.
Here is the advantage of SOAS: You're not lost at microeconomic theories or mathematical models about regressions. You have a plenty of applied classes and you can catch the latest discussions. You have the opportunity to make analyses of current problems facing in different regions. This is something you cannot find in other universities. You're at the university, but not stuck in the close market of theories, though this may give over-confidence to some students and made them think that they have a command of everything going on across the world.
Journalism also mean a life between impact and reaction, or challenge and response. It is more like a life-standing conflict, a fight you can never give up. If you give up, then you're simply out. On the other hand, you can find a more quiet and a happier life at universities. Of course there is a fight here too, and it's usually even a more ideological and a deeper one, but at least you can go to bed without thinking about it when everything settled down.
One practical difference I have to mention is the working hours. Academics can be completely off when they are out of the university, but journalists have no regular working hours, there is no such thing as being off. The life doesn't stop here. When some sleep in the Middle East, others in the US are announcing their plans about them. Or all of a sudden, in the midnight, you can hear a possible coup attempt and go out immediately, saying as a Turkish.
Overall, each profession has its own beauties and difficulties although they are greatly inter-dependent. It’s up to you to shape your profession. But don’t worry, you can jump from one to another, or create your own space in between.
Published on SOAS blog on 2 May 2017.
Yorumlar
Yorum Gönder