It's good to understand

Are journalists and general readers of newspapers really that different? Does the average person hate the gatekeeper?

Where is the appreciation for journalists, and why don't journalists care more for the common reader?

The ombudswoman for the Washington Post sets out to try to figure out the tensions between viewers of the media and media members themselves. The ombudswoman, Deborah Howell, makes extremely important and insightful points, as society still has a long way to go in terms of its maturation process. It's a shame that those who determine the news and who do the best they can in terms of delivering respectable content are generally disliked by the public.

All the hate affects the approach to different problems; that altered approach has an impact on news editing decisions, editorial decisions, and the effort put into a story.

Howell wrote, "Each reader comes with special needs and interests." And the implication is both good and bad. The good is that it's certainly positive to be able to think outside the box independently; a healthy mind -- especially in relation to media content -- leads to healthy discussion and a flourishing democracy full of ideas and innovation. But the unfortunate implication of the observation has to do with cynicism. People -- readers -- are cynical; a lot of them, and seemingly with a greater and greater frequency. With so much anger, sometimes journalists are unfairly not given a chance.

The flared passions give journalists and editors a very small window to properly tell a story the way he or she would want to. And not being able to edit or write naturally due to fears about the reaction of the readership takes away from some of what makes journalism great and useful in the first place: that the people involved with the media content are coming up with the best ideas at the time, as those ideas will have a possible noble effect on society.

But when a person looks harshly through the lenses of just his or her realm, then a story cannot be seen for what it is. And that fact is a major problem. In this day an age, we need solutions, not more problems. Skepticism is ok; outright cynicism is not.

Importantly, however, editors and writers need to have a thicker skin. With rabid response available in today's media, readers will make their feelings known -- and known loudly. If a journalist is able to take instant criticism, -- even if it's very harsh -- then that maturity usually goes a long way. Emotions about self-loathing shouldn't get mixed up with fact versus anything that doesn't meet the standard of fact. The disconnect between media members and society truly hurts journalism, but a fix is possible.

It's important to consider common humanity. Especially in today's scary times, we need to be in this together. Yet also, having some kind of disconnect is ok because journalists have to be ready at a moment's notice to potentially say something damaging to a person he or she cares about or who he or she has covered in a beat for years and years because journalism is not about selfishness and making friends -- but about accountability, truth, trust, and doing what is right. Ironically, if people believed the aforementioned were truly the case, journalism would be psychologically in healthier shape than it is today.

After talking about bias and self-righteousness regarding readers and journalists, Howell then wrote, "But then along comes a financial crisis, and where besides major newspapers and their Web sites can readers get authoritative coverage of what is engulfing us?" When push comes to shove, the public needs journalism because who will lookout for truth? Who will hold people accountable and hold their feet to the fire? Newspaper writers, journalists in general, etc.

It's important to note that the haste and hateful feelings between media and non media need to calm down because one cannot think clearly and in a fully rational manner if there is such unnecessary anger pent up inside. Journalists work very, very, very hard -- and most work honorably. And most individuals who are not journalists work very tirelessly and diligently and deserve some empathy. With the Internet being used more and more, it's much easier to express anger and to write viral comments to one another as opposed to picking up a telephone or speaking to someone face to face. So, maybe the issue between viewers and journalists has been mighty similar all along.

But regardless, it's important for communication to be readily possible between journalists and the ones who follow the stories because communication and understanding are ways to solve problems and ways to create a sense of trust. Readers will feel like the writer truly does have empathy for a situation, and journalists will understand where others are coming from.

Understanding makes all the difference in the world; understanding is a good start to anything.