Cuomo’s, Just Have Some Fun!
In the Pandemic Prime Time for the Cuomo Brothers article, the authors discuss how the government-meets-media relationship between the two brothers is a comedic relief that viewers need during the stresses of this COVID-19 pandemic. Their professional work and playful “bromantic” banter have been successful in delivering news of the pandemic to families and individuals worldwide. This delivers a fun twist in how news can be shared in a way that is relatable, entertaining, and hits close to home.
The “social contract” as defined by Pech & Leibel (2006) is a tactic agreement between mainstream journalism and the public that serves the goal of rational, deliberative discourse about significant matters concerning local, state, and federal government. In their article, Pech & Leibel (2006) conclude that mainstream journalism must be non-partisan to follow the ethical “social contract” of journalism.
Pech & Leibel (2006) argue that the Cuomo brothers have defied the ethical “social contract” of journalism through their media, however, it was still appropriate, in my opinion, for the two brothers to take part in their on-screen interview because they only discussed the topic at hand — the pandemic. The interview remained professional and there were no extreme or unwarranted opinions or biases that affected the outcome of the discussion.
In terms of news reporting more generally, news reporters and journalists worldwide are on-screen or writing in popular blogs about recent events, trends, and breaking news that occurs around the world. There are many different news stations that propagate stories with their own bias perspective in order to influence viewers of their argument or their specific point of view. Some of these news stations are Fox News, MSNBC, and CNN. This provokes the question of whether or not news reporting should be impartial.
When political news and stories are leaked to the press or even purposefully shared, it would be desirable to have a level of neutrality when releasing the news story. Since members of the media hold much influence and power over viewers, they should be mindful of how their opinions and bias can sway public opinion. I can see how a part of journalism is considered entertainment, since the news stations want to keep the interest of their millions of daily viewers, however, a level of respect should remain over the news story itself without the complete insertion of that particular media outlets opinion. In Pech & Liebel’s (2006) reading, the authors discuss how there is a tacit agreement between mainstream journalism and the public. They discuss four key claims:
- About what mainstream journalism reports
- About how mainstream journalism is to report it
- About the overall goal of the institution of mainstream journalism
- About the audience
These four claims serve as a goal of rational and purposeful discourse regarding significant matters concerning local, state, and federal governments (Pech & Liebel, 2006). They continue to mention how journalists should neutrally report events and have creditability and validation in a democratic society. This reading in particular has increased my interest in how the media communicates in the political arena, and how it is critical to choose wisely where you receive your news from. The opinion of one news station over the other can have significant differences of opinion and switching between two or more of these news channels can cause confusion and unwanted political influence over a person.
References
Pech, G., & Leibel, R. (2006). Writing in Solidarity: Steps Toward an Ethic of Care for Journalism. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 21(2–3), 141–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/08900523.2006.9679730
