During the past fortnight, for most of which I’ve been on holiday, I have been riveted, like so many, by the unfolding story of Jason Arday. I have tried several times to write something about it, only to be overtaken by events or indeed articles by people who, unlike me, are still writing full-time. (If by some chance you don’t know what I’m talking about, I’ve linked to lots of articles below.)
So I’ll not even try to keep up with the story, and instead just share a few observations over a few posts about what it means for two sectors I care about a great deal about: journalism and academia. Short version: journalism has come through (so far at least) with flying colours; academia could hardly have done worse.
I think that a big part of why journalism came through this test so well is because of the severe test posed by the aftermath of the police killing of George Floyd. Until now I wouldn’t have been sure that the necessary lessons had been learned.
During the summer of 2020, newsrooms were working almost entirely remotely. Lockdowns were driving people mad. Protests under the banner of Black Lives Matter were shading into looting and rioting, and sober, accurate, fearless journalism about race, prejudice, violence and policing was missing in action. Many journalists, especially younger ones, had abandoned even the pretence of independence or neutrality, stating openly that their mission was not to report evenhandedly but to use their platform to campaign for a particular vision of “social justice”.
