By in Writing

Is journalism too dangerous?

Is journalism too dangerous?

The recent massacre that took place in Paris claimed the lives of eight journalists belonging to Charlie Hebdo shook the entire world. Is the life of a journalist too dangerous to work in this adverse situation? Accidently, I happen to read about the killings of journalists during 2014. According to the data recorded in (Committee to Protect Journalists) around 61 journalists were killed during the last year and the data exposes that 17 journalists were killed in Syria alone.

Whenever journalists go extreme on any issue or provoke the feelings of a group or come out with anti-Government issues, they are more exposed to attack and death. Investigative journalism is more dangerous in all countries; however, it’s inevitable for a journalist to carry out his mission without risk as they expose the truth to the world which is not known to the world. Eventually, Bob Woodward came to lime light through his investigative journalistic performance in the renowned Watergate Scandal. In my opinion, journalism is like driving – speed thrills, but kills – to be handled cautiously.

Jornalism Writing Magazines Scandals Politics Terrorism

You will need an account to comment - feel free to register or login.


AsADrivenLeaf wrote on January 22, 2015, 11:36 AM

Journalists are in danger of death-threats if they report the unbiased truth; and are forced to compromise and manipulate facts by hiding the truth. Our civilized, educated world is starving from Honest reporting these days.

Squidwhisperer wrote on January 22, 2015, 1:35 PM

I think the profession has always been risky, when journalists are reporting from conflict zones, or just probing into powerful people. The slight difference I see with the Charlie Hebdo attack is that the victims were cartoonists. Satirists. The irony was that they were killed by people who don't "fundamentally" get it.

Nar2Reviews wrote on January 22, 2015, 1:41 PM

I dont think think journalists can carry out "their mission" risk free though. The profession has always been risky, even before the tragedy in Paris; one only has to remember the death of our HRH Princess Diana, even though the paparazzi weren't held wholly responsible, they contributed to the fact that the car she was travelling could not get away from them fast enough.

bestwriter wrote on January 22, 2015, 7:17 PM

There is no need to write something that is provocative.

vickywrites wrote on January 22, 2015, 9:56 PM

I do agree. Things can be expressed in a polite and gentle manner without hurting the sentiments or religious feelings of people. At times, journalists fail to see how much the cartoons insult the person about whom they make cartoons. I think there need to be a balance practiced in journalism.

vickywrites wrote on January 22, 2015, 10:04 PM

Yeah, Journalism is one of the most dangerous professions, in the sense that the writer can be identified any moment and the revenge can be taken against for exposing anyone or anything. Precisely, investigative journalism involves high degree of risk. However, I observed that journalists, in a large extent, enjoy their professional thrill -- as death is inevitable for everyone. I remember a saying," Not taking risk is a risk"

vickywrites wrote on January 22, 2015, 10:11 PM

Yeah, Sadism never compromise with sarcastic or satirical expressions. Practically, in the core of any religious fundamentalism, no room exists for brutality. In opinion, religions are meant to make human beings better -- not bitter.

bestwriter wrote on January 22, 2015, 10:12 PM

The whole world was supporting when Paris was attacked. I found it obnoxious!

vickywrites wrote on January 22, 2015, 10:17 PM

Honest, genuine, and sincere journalists are likely to become scapegoats. Favoritism in journalism is obviously contrary to the professional ethics. Of course, there're many other professions in which the performer is exposed to risk if he does it truthfully. We need to remember that we will in a corrupted world.

vickywrites wrote on January 22, 2015, 10:31 PM

One of the founders of Charlie Hebdo accused the editor for dragging a team into death by making the provocative cartoon against the prophet. I think the whole world supported the journalists because of sympathy -- they were killed violently.

bestwriter wrote on January 22, 2015, 11:00 PM

I understand that but bias stood out.

Squidwhisperer wrote on January 22, 2015, 11:12 PM

I disagree. That, in many ways, is the ROLE of journalism, to provoke discussion on a significant social/political issue. Journalism must reflect society. Martin Luther King was provocative, as was Mandela and Gandhi and Lincoln and - for us here in Canada, in a more limited sense - Trudeau. I'm troubled to note [as a guy] that all my examples are guys, but this too speaks to the societal restrictions - around the world - that have limited women's voices in the last four or five thousand years, and certainly limited their access to political/social/religious power. Why are there more kings than queens? Why are all the prophets male? Why are there no female Popes? Why are brides still burned - and not grooms?

vickywrites wrote on January 23, 2015, 6:23 AM

Actually, the discussion is regarding the role of journalists, not on female voice.
Well, the provocation should not to be so forceful to drag someone into violence. Still, during the time of arrest we find the face of the accused is being covered. To some extent, we need to respect the feelings of the individuals. Practically speaking, even if a child is provoked extremely by his parents, he's going to bust into violence which is a natural phenomenon.

Nar2Reviews wrote on January 23, 2015, 9:37 AM

Journalists are seldom sincere; they are being paid for a job. It is the content in which they are being paid to be published that can be sincere. You have to be very versatile to be a journalist, but at times impartial with yourself. Secondly, Paris is no stranger to violence; the Parisians are very racist towards the Black African community, much of which has never been highlighted in worldwide news.

Squidwhisperer wrote on January 23, 2015, 10:20 AM

You're right. I veered off topic. And you're also right that journalists and satirists would be safer if they kept their work polite and gentle. Though I would think it would be difficult to keep polite and gentle while reporting on certain "religious-based" behaviour - whether bride-burning or beheading or gang-rape or stoning.

cheri wrote on March 2, 2015, 8:20 AM

Being a journalist is really dangerous. It is really difficult but it is more of a devotion and commitment for the love of truth and information.