Conclusion

In conclusion I can take from my research into the subject that their are various dangers that face modern journalists in the 21st century but it is fair to say that most of these dangers are self inflicted. In all most all circumstances the journalists that face danger put themselves in these "front line" reporting situation in which the element of danger is what makes the story popular or interesting to the target audience. The real issue is whether the stories that are being reported are worth putting yourself in danger for; whether the stories that are being reported are sensationalist stories that aren't worth the danger that they entail or if they are genuinely information based pieces that have substance and importance, things that need to be reported rather than things that are being reported in a sensationalist manner.

The two journalists that I have included in my research provide perfect examples as they both has conflicting styles and reasons for reporting. James Foley throughout his career has reported in areas of conflict and war putting himself on the "front line" to report on stories that arguably could effect the wider population; issues such as war. This type of journalism arguably it is necessary to put yourself in harms way covering important issues that are at the forefront of the public eye and interest. In comparison to the other journalist that I have featured, Louis Theroux, who tends to report in arguably a more sensationalist manner. Theroux reports on issues will not necessary have any impact at all on the wider public. Theroux's most famous documentary on the Westboro Baptist Church is a prime example of this as it covers a very small in comparison issue that will only effect a niche part of the population rather than being a story of greater importance that will effect the wider population like the reporting of James Foley. In no way does this make Theroux a lesser respected professional as the weird, small and unheard of issues are his angle, his unique selling point. Theroux never claims to report on "mainstream" issues or issues considered important within the public eye.

Undoubtedly both of these journalists have put themselves at significant danger and risk for what they are passionate about whether that be "front line" journalism reporting from a war zone or "front line" journalism reporting from a small extremist church in the US. Both decide to put themselves in this danger and that is the main point of analysis that can be taken from this; It is not whether the public believe that these journalists should put themselves in these types of danger but whether the journalists themselves consider the danger to be worthwhile and necessary. The dangers that face modern journalists in the 21st century are determined by the journalists themselves and what path of reporting they individually decide to take.