01 Barbie-Zelizer

Memory Studies
http://mss.sagepub.com Why memory's work on journalism does not reflect journalism's work on memory
Barbie Zelizer Memory Studies 2008; 1; 79 DOI: 10.1177/1750698007083891 The online version of this article can be found at: http://mss.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/1/1/79
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
Additional services and information for Memory Studies can be found at: Email Alerts: http://mss.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://mss.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations (this article cites 18 articles hosted on the SAGE Journals Online and HighWire Press platforms): http://mss.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/1/1/79
Downloaded from http://mss.sagepub.com at UNIV OF PENNSYLVANIA LIBRARY on August 17, 2008 2008 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
Why memorys work on journalism does not reflect journalisms work on memory
BARBIE ZELIZER, University of Pennsylvania, USA Abstract
This article discusses the symbiotic, though uneven, relationship linking scholarship on journalism and memory. Though work on collective memory has yet to recognize the centrality of journalism as an institution of mnemonic record, memory creeps into journalistic relay so often that it renders journalisms memory work both widespread and multi-faceted. This renders journalism a key agent of memory work, even if journalists themselves are averse to admitting it as part of what they do and even if memory scholars have not yet given journalism its due.
Key words
collective memory; journalism; news
Memory and journalism resemble two distant cousins. They know of each others existence, acknowledge their shared environment from time to time and proceed apace as autonomous phenomena without seeming to depend on the other. And yet neither reaches optimum functioning without the other occupying a backdrop. Just as journalism needs memory work to position its recounting of public events in context, so too does memory need journalism to provide one of the most public drafts of the past. Two questions motivate the symbiotic, though uneven, relationship linking journalism and memory. What do memorys journalistic work and journalisms memory work look like? And why are they not the same?
MEMORYS WORK ON JOURNALISM

To say that memory work depends in part on journalism is to state a truism that should be obvious to memory scholars though it is not necessarily recognized by journalists. In that the work of memory draws from a wide range of sources performances, testimonies,
MEMORY STUDIES SAGE Publications 2008, Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore www.sagepublications.com, ISSN 1750-6980, Vol 1(1): 7987 [DOI: 10.1177/1750698007083891]
80
MEMORY STUDIES 1(1)
standards of conduct and material artifacts, to name a few the accounts provided by journalists constitute an important source of information about practices, issues and events of a given time period. The relevance of journalists work to understanding the past, however, is not necessarily admitted by journalists, who neither explicitly speak of the past nor consider the past as part of their obvious purview. As purveyors of the present, they tend instead to display both obliviousness and disregard for what is in effect their unstated role as agents of memory. Prompted perhaps by journalists ambivalence about their relationship to the past, journalism is not often cited by scholars as an obvious source of memory work. Many of the key theorists of collective memory Paul Connerton (1989), Maurice Halbwachs (1992), Jacques Le Goff (1992), among others did not include journalism in their surveys of what matters in the work of memory. Even Pierre Nora (1997), who devoted volumes to the study of unusual sites of memory, did not include journalism along his list of street signs, recipes and holiday rituals. And more recent work on memory particularly surveys by Jeffrey Alexander (1992), Robin Wagner-Pacici (1996) and Jeffrey Olick (1999) implied the recognition of journalists but did not parcel out which attributes of their treatment of the past qualied as the journalistic work of memory. What this means is that even today, decades into the systematic scholarly study of collective memory, there is still no default understanding of memory that includes journalism as one of its vital and critical agents. One of the key lessons of contemporary memory studies is that vast and intricate memory work is being accomplished all the time in settings having little to do with memory per se. While the scholarly understanding of other key institutions religion, the educational system, the political system, to name a few has produced a picture that includes practices and conventions associated with an unarticulated but patterned treatment of the past, such has not been the case with journalism. Though some work has moved in such a direction notably, Schudson (1992,1995), Zelizer (1992, 1998, 2001), Edy (1999), Huxford (2001), Meyers (2002), Kitch (2005), Volkmar (2006) not all of it has entered the mainstream of collective memory studies. Thus, there still remains an insufciently clear sense of what journalism does with the past that is different, singular, interesting or problematic. Part of this disregard may have to do with a lingering presumption that journalisms treatments of the past are more closely aligned with mainstream historical work than with memory. In that journalists address to the past by denition runs contrary to their own concern for the present, journalism at rst glance seems an ill-suited setting to provide a meaningful tracking of the past. For as long as journalism has been around, the popular assumption has been that it provides a rst, rather than nal, draft of the past, leaving to the historians the nal processing of journalisms raw events. Against such a division of labor, journalism has come to be seen as a setting driven more by its emphasis on the here-and-now than on the there-and-then, restricted by temporal limitations associated with rapidly overturning deadlines. Journalists distinguish themselves from those dealing with the past by aspiring to a sense of newsworthiness that draws from proximity, topicality and novelty, and they are motivated by an ongoing need to ll a depleting news-hole despite high stakes, a frantic pace and uncertain resources. In this regard, the past seems somewhat beyond the boundaries of what
ZELIZER
MEMORY AND JOURNALISM
81
journalists can and ought to do in accomplishing their work goals (Zelizer, 1993a). As Edy (1999: 74) succinctly states: the fact that news media make use of historical events at all is somewhat counterintuitive. Journalists have traditionally placed a high value on being the rst to publicize new information. Extra editions, news ashes, and program interruptions for important new information all testify to a desire to present the latest information to audiences. Many stories go out of date and cannot be used if there is not space in the news product for them on the day that they occur. Not surprisingly, then, the past is seen as being outside the parameters of journalists attention, at least in journalists explicit discussion of what they do as journalists. For their part, historians have generally agreed with journalisms rendering of the past to others. Often less interested in the variations and contradictions that arise in the record over time than they have been in securing a durable, accurate and reliable recounting of the past, historians have valued journalists address to events as a presentoriented treatment. That address has tended to provide, at least explicitly, a durable record associated with historys rst draft and a respect for truth, facts and reality (Zelizer, 2004b). But although historians regularly rely on news accounts of the past to establish the facts of what happened in a given time period, even among historians, journalisms treatments have been suspect (i.e. Nevins, 1959). In short, in many places in the academy, the its just journalism rejoinder persists whenever journalists voices are heard (Zelizer, 2004b). All of this suggests that the particular division of labor by which journalists take care of the present and historians take care of the past, both sharing a reverence for truth, facts and reality, has blinded both in considering what else happens when journalists look backward. That myopic vision has extended in large part to memory studies. Not only has there been little attempt to single out what is unique about journalism in addressing the days of yore, but discussions of memory have not sufciently recognized that journalisms treatment of the present often includes a treatment of the past. Nor have they accounted for the fact that journalisms treatment of the past tends to be as variable, malleable and dynamic as other kinds of memory work. Journalism and journalists are an unobvious but fertile site of memory, and their status as memory agents needs to be better understood.
JOURNALISMS WORK OF MEMORY

What, then, does journalisms work of memory look like? Journalisms alignment with the past reects a more complicated dynamic and invested relationship than that suggested by traditional notions of history. Journalists have set their collective recollections and reconstructions of the past in place by attending to their own agendas. As Lang and Lang (1989: 126) argued, in journalism: even cursory perusal reveals many references to events no longer new and hence not news in the journalistic sense. This past and future together frame the reporting of
82
MEMORY STUDIES 1(1)
current events. Just what part of the past and what kind of future are brought into play depends on what editors and journalists believe legitimately belongs within the public domain, on journalistic conventions, and of course on personal ideologies. References to the past help journalists regularly make sense of a rapidly evolving present, build connections, suggest inferences, create story pegs, act as yardsticks for gauging an events magnitude and impact, offer analogies and provide short-hand explanations (Lang and Lang, 1989). And although much has been made of journalists so called reliance on the commandment questions of news the who, what, where, when and how of journalism, with not enough emphasis on the why (Carey, 1986) a necessary attachment to the explanatory paradigms underlying current events is always there for the taking in journalism. The past thus remains one of the richest repositories available to journalists for explaining current events. What kind of a memory record does journalism provide? The particular rules and conventions that characterize journalism make it well suited as memory work in certain ways but limited in others. Drawing from memory and the past offers an obvious source through which to understand topical events. Practices such as rewrites, revisits to old events, commemorative or anniversary journalism and even investigations of seemingly historical events and happenings are regular occurrences in the daily register of newsmaking (Zelizer, 1993a; Edy, 1999). But when journalists look to the past in telling the news of the present, they strategically weave then and now by combining two strategies: they uphold journalisms reverence for facts, truth and reality while drawing on the singular characteristics of memory work, as delineated by Zelizer (1995) its processual nature, unpredictability, partiality, usability, simultaneous particularity and universality, and materality. News stories are always in process, gravitate toward unpredictability as a criterion of newsworthiness, are always partial and still unfolding, and are usable to members of the public in different ways. News stories also tend to combine a particular grounding in the details of a news event with a broader, more universal message. And nally, news stories often have a material existence, though the nature of materiality is changing in an era of online news. In recounting events, journalists deliver news stories by combining content and form in ways conventionalized by news organizations. By and large, journalists pride themselves on content, rst and foremost, following the news story and playing to occurrences that are important, interesting, timely and important, regardless of the form in which they are told. This has produced a gravitation toward simplistic narratives, a tendency to record without context, and a minimization of nuance and the grey areas of a phenomenon, all of which restrict journalisms ability to account for the past. While the focus on content makes journalisms status as memory work problematic, the forms of relay that journalists regularly use suggest a picture that is far more aligned with the work of memory than its content would suggest. In fact, the particular forms of journalistic relay bring memory work directly into the foreground of journalism. Journalistic form takes on numerous guises in association with the past. In that the past offers a point of comparison, an opportunity for analogy, an invitation to nostalgia and a redress to earlier events, journalisms look to the past suggests some
ZELIZER
83
attendance to memory, though journalists do not insist on or even necessarily recognize its presence. Once journalists begin to make decisions about which stories play in which medium and using which tools for relay, they nd themselves squarely in the realm of memorys work. This makes form a leading sign of memorys presence, even if journalists do not admit as much. In this regard, the ascendance of the past in journalism enhances the possibility for journalists to act as sleuths of the past. In events as wide ranging as the Kennedy assassination (Zelizer, 1992), Watergate (Schudson, 1992), and recollections of Richard Nixon (Johnson, 1995), journalists are able to accommodate the pasts variations and complications. Form incorporates memory into journalism in three main ways. At times, the coverage itself is structured formalistically in a way that insists on an engagement with the past; in these cases, form necessitates memory. Other times, the coverage is structured in a way that invites engagement with the past but keeps a footing in the present; in these cases, form invites memory. And nally, at times, coverage includes an address to the past so as to better treat an event in the past, though such treatment is neither necessary nor even clear; in such cases, form indulges memory.
JOURNALISTIC FORM NECESSITATES MEMORY

When form necessitates memory, journalists produce obits, rewrites and revisits to old events as typical of commemorative and anniversary journalism. In such cases, journalists would not have a story were they not to go back in time. Looking backward, then, is what makes the journalistic treatment newsworthy. Often news topics look backward simply because attending to the topic forces an engagement with the past. Obituaries, for instance, are modes of engaging with the past as a way of coming to grips with the nality of death. Here, journalism is driven by mnemonic forms that exist because they can easily produce more newswork. Dependent on periodic reinstatement, these include various kinds of commemorative discourse, retrospective issues and other modes of anniversary journalism. Special projects produced by news organizations strategically address the past and are produced for that aim, such as the publication and broadcast of retrospective issues, programs, special broadcasts, books and volumes that track either a general past as in the state of a particular news organization, particular news medium or journalism writ broadly over time or a specic past, as in the coverage of a particular news event or social issue over time. Meyers (2002), for instance, showed how the news treatments of Israels national celebrations were shaped by references to earlier celebrations.
JOURNALISTIC FORM INVITES MEMORY

When form invites memory, journalism uses the past so as to engage with the present. Neither necessary nor central to the journalistic coverage that ensues, journalism in
84
MEMORY STUDIES 1(1)
this instance produces a variety of journalistic forms that allow for the present and past to be discussed in some kind of simultaneous relay. Included here would be historical analogues, direct comparisons between present and past, and investigations of seemingly historical events. Historical analogies are the most prevalent mnemonic journalistic form, as in Times labeling of its coverage of the Iraq War as Gulf War II (Zelizer, 2004a) or in discussions of the Columbia Shuttle disaster as a repeat of the Challenger explosion (Edy and Daradanova, 2006). Kitch (2005) tracked how US magazines recycled celebrity stories and stories of a certain kind of nation state as the predictable repository of content across time. Wardle (2007) considered stories of child murder against the historical contingencies that forced a similar story into differential shapes across time periods. Predictably, the past is at times remembered erroneously. One discussion of the US coverage of the Vietnam and rst Gulf War showed how the news media labeled war protestors as anti-troop not during the Vietnam War but during the rst Gulf War, as a way of strategically misremembering war dissidence so as to better t journalistic discussions of the later conict (Beamish et al., 1995). Visually, journalists played to similar visual patterns in the representations of events as wide ranging as war atrocities in Bosnia, Rwanda and the war in Iraq (Zelizer, 1998, 2004a). Here, much of journalists engagement with the past takes place along explanatory lines. The limitation of this memory work is that it gravitates to familiar sources and that the same forms that facilitate memory work also drive it along lines that are familiar and already known. Journalists make extensive effort to track the past by explicitly and strategically following journalisms own earlier projects. Grainge (2002) offered a thoughtful analysis of Times various attempts to track the hundred most inuential people of the 20th century. He found, not surprisingly, that the 100 list read as a particular kind of memory text, a guration of collective cultural inheritance, which Times sought to promulgate as a memory of democratic and capitalistic achievement (p. 204). Zelizer (1993b) found that journalists do a kind of double-time on the events that they report, allowing them to correct in later coverage what they missed earlier: thus, they adapted earlier reportage of both McCarthyism and Watergate into stories that better t their evolving understandings of the events. Journalism tends to produce mnemonic work through those news organizations with the most extensive archives, and in this regard certain kinds of news institutions, organizations and individuals are better attuned than others to be producing memory work. For instance, Kitch (2006) showed how Time Inc. became a predictable repository for crafting memories of the past by virtue of its extensive and accessible data retrieval system. Even individual journalists who tend to address the past are those who were themselves involved in the past being addressed: Dan Rather has been at the helm of mnemonic addresses to the Kennedy assassination, which he covered as a cub reporter (Zelizer, 1992); the story of Watergate has been recounted over the years through the celebrated persona of Woodward and Bernstein (Schudson, 1992). In this regard, then, journalisms memory is often formulaic and predictable and varies less than one might expect. But this is
ZELIZER
85
more the case when considering the practices of journalism that are closest to its explicit sense of self; conversely, it is less the case when thinking about the wide range of journalisms practices, regardless of the degree to which they match journalisms rhetoric.
JOURNALISTIC FORM INDULGES MEMORY

When form indulges memory, the past is brought into a news story as an aside or afterthought. Though memory and the past are neither necessary nor critical to understanding the contemporary news story, here journalists produce investigations of the present that are illuminated by some foray into the past. The inclusion of the past helps illuminate the centrality that the past plays in helping journalists make sense of the present. For instance, while events involving death often themselves make good news stories, journalists often look to memory when the public needs help in recovering from the trauma surrounding death. The US response to 9/11, for instance, was crafted in conjunction with the news medias capacity to move the story of grief toward one of recovery (Kitch, 2003). Similarly, the news medias tracking of the deaths of journalists killed in Iraq was crafted around larger narratives associated with the viability of collective memory and journalistic professionalism (Carlson, 2006).
MEMORYS WORK ON JOURNALISM VERSUS JOURNALISMS WORK ON MEMORY

All of this suggests that much work still needs to be done before memorys work on journalism reects journalisms work on memory. Beyond the question of content, which will inevitably remain the central draw for journalists addressing the past, impulses of necessity, invitation and indulgence allow journalism to look backward while attending to the news relay of contemporary times. Though work on collective memory has yet to recognize the centrality of journalism as an institution of mnemonic record, memory creeps into journalistic relay in sundry ways. Each necessitates an address to the past, rendering journalisms memory work both widespread and multi-faceted. Recounting the present is laced with an intricate repertoire of practices that involve an often obscured engagement with the past. This renders journalism a key agent of memory work, even if journalists themselves are averse to admitting it as part of what they do. This means that we are far from knowing what journalism can tell us more broadly about how memory takes shape. As journalism continues to function as one of contemporary societys main institutions of recording and remembering, we need to invest more efforts in understanding how it remembers and why it remembers in the ways that it does.
86
MEMORY STUDIES 1(1)
Acknowledgements
Parts of this article will appear in Journalism and Memory, in Vita Fortunait and Elena Agazzi (eds) Body, Mind, Sociality. Rome: Meltemi, in press (Italian) and Journalisms Memory Work, in Astrid Erll and Ansgar Nnning (eds) Cultural Memory Studies. An International and Interdisciplinary Handbook (Media and Cultural Memory VII). De Gruyter: Berlin and New York, in press. Thanks to Dan Berger for assistance.
References
Alexander, Jeffrey (1992) The Revival of the Sociology of Culture: The Case of Collective Memory, Sociological Forum 7(2): 36573. Beamish, Thomas D., Harvey Molotch and Richard Flacks (1995) Who Supports the Troops? Vietnam, the Gulf War, and the Making of Collective Memory, Social Problems 42(3): 34460. Carey, James (1986) The Dark Continent of American Journalism, in Robert Manoff and Michael Schudson (eds) Reading the News, pp. 14696. New York: Pantheon. Carlson, Matt (2006) War Journalism and the KIA Journalist: The Cases of David Bloom and Michael Kelly, Critical Studies in Media Communication 23(2): 91111. Connerton, Paul (1989) How Societies Remember. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Edy, Jill (1999) Journalistic Uses of Collective Memory, Journal of Communication 49(2): 7185. Edy, Jill A. and Miglena Daradanova (2006) Reporting the Present Through the Lens of the Past: From Challenger to Columbia, Journalism: Theory, Practice and Criticism 7(2): 13151. Grainge, Paul (2002) Remembering the American Century: Media Memory and the Time 100 List, International Journal of Cultural Studies 5(2): 20119. Halbwachs, Maurice (1992) On Collective Memory, ed., trans. and with an Introduction by Lewis A. Coser. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Huxford, John (2001) Beyond the Referential: Uses of Visual Symbolism in the Press, Journalism: Theory, Practice and Criticism 2(1): 4572. Johnson, Thomas J. (1995) The Rehabilitation of Richard Nixon: The Medias Effect on Collective Memory. New York: Garland Press. Kitch, Carolyn (2003) Mourning in America: Ritual, Redemption, and Recovery in News Narrative After September 11, Journalism Studies 4(2): 21324. Kitch, Carolyn (2005) Pages From the Past: History and Memory in American Magazines. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Kitch, Carolyn (2006) Useful Memory in Time Inc Magazines, Journalism Studies 7(1): 94110. Lang, Kurt and Gladys Engel Lang (1989) Collective Memory and the News, Communication 11: 12339. Le Goff, Jacques (1992) History and Memory. Columbia: Columbia Univeristy Press. Meyers, Oren (2002) Still Photographs, Dynamic Memories: An Analysis of the Visual Presentation of Israels History in Commemorative Newspaper Supplements, Communication Review 5(3): 179205. Nevins, Allan (1959) American Journalism and Its Historical Treatment, Journalism Quarterly 36(4): 41122, 519. Nora, Pierre (1997) Realms of Memory. New York: Columbia University Press. Olick, Jeffrey (1999) Collective Memory: The Two Cultures, Sociological Theory 17(3): 33348.
ZELIZER
87
Schudson, Michael (1992) Watergate in American Memory: How We Remember, Forget and Reconstruct the Past. New York: Basic Books. Schudson, Michael (1995) Dynamics of Distortion in Collective Memory, in Daniel Schacter (ed.) Memory Distortion: How Minds, Brains and Societies Reconstruct the Past, pp. 34664. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Volkmer, Ingrid (ed.) (2006) News in Public Memory. New York: Peter Lang. Wagner-Pacifici, Robin (1996) Memories in the Making: The Shape of Things That Went, Qualitative Sociology 19(3): 30120. Wardle, Claire (2007) Monsters and Angels: Visual Press Coverage of Child Murders in the US and UK, 19301990, Journalism: Theory, Practice and Criticism 8(4): 26384. Zelizer, Barbie (1992) Covering the Body: The Kennedy Assassination, the Media and the Shaping of Collective Memory. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Zelizer, Barbie (1993a) News: First or Final Draft of History?, Mosaic 2: 23. Zelizer, Barbie (1993b) Journalists as Interpretive Communities, Critical Studies in Mass Communication 10: 21937. Zelizer, Barbie (1995) Reading the Past Against the Grain: The Shape of Memory Studies, Critical Studies in Mass Communication 12(2): 21539. Zelizer, Barbie (1998) Remembering To Forget: Holocaust Memory Through the Cameras Eye. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Zelizer, Barbie (2001) Collective Memory as Time-out: Repairing the TimeCommunity Link, in Gregory J. Shepherd and Eric Rothenbuhler (eds) Communication and Community, pp. 1819. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum. Zelizer, Barbie (2004a) When War is Reduced to a Photograph, in Stuart Allan and Barbie Zelizer (eds) Reporting War: Journalism in Wartime, pp. 11535. London: Routledge. Zelizer, Barbie (2004b) Taking Journalism Seriously: News and the Academy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
BARBIE ZELIZER is the Raymond Williams Professor of Communication and Director of the Scholars Program in Culture and Communication at the University of Pennsylvanias Annenberg School for Communication, USA. A former journalist, Zelizer has authored or edited seven books, including the award-winning Remembering to Forget: Holocaust Memory Through the Cameras Eye (Chicago, IL 1998). A recipient of a Guggenheim Fellowship, a Freedom Forum Center Research Fellowship and a Fellowship from Harvard Universitys Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics, and Public Policy, Zelizer is also a media critic, whose work has appeared in The Nation, the Jim Lehrer News Hour, Newsday and Radio National of Australia. Co-editor of Journalism: Theory, Practice and Criticism, she is presently working on a book on about-to-die photographs and journalism. Address: Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, 3620 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 191046220, USA. Email: bzelizer@asc.upenn.edu

01 Barbie-Zelizer

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

01 Barbie-Zelizer

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Memory Studies

MEMORYS WORK ON JOURNALISM

MEMORY STUDIES 1(1)

MEMORY AND JOURNALISM

JOURNALISMS WORK OF MEMORY

MEMORY STUDIES 1(1)

MEMORY AND JOURNALISM

JOURNALISTIC FORM NECESSITATES MEMORY

JOURNALISTIC FORM INVITES MEMORY

MEMORY STUDIES 1(1)

MEMORY AND JOURNALISM

JOURNALISTIC FORM INDULGES MEMORY

MEMORYS WORK ON JOURNALISM VERSUS JOURNALISMS WORK ON MEMORY

MEMORY STUDIES 1(1)

MEMORY AND JOURNALISM

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen