Home     Writers     Op/Ed     Book Reviews     News     Bookstore     Photoshops     Submit     Search     Contact Us     Advertise  
  You are here: 

Fri

28

Aug

2009

Journalism joins God... both dead.
Friday, 28 August 2009 05:50
by Stephen P. Pizzo

I knew it was time to get out of the business. I was talking to a bunch of young J-school grads about the state of journalism and something they found appalling. I bemoaned the fact that today's news stories were little more than "he-said, she-said" reports. Then I dropped "the bomb;"

"Look, I know that a good reporter is not supposed to go into a story with a bias or preconceived option one way or the other. But, after weeks of in-depth research, with interviews and access to information their readers can never have, they sure as hell better come of it with an informed opinion. Otherwise, what's the purpose of the exercise in the first place?"

Jaws dropped around the room. What!!? An opinion? Sacrilege! Because, it dawned on me, journalism, which for me had always meant pursuit of the truth, be it what it may, had become a religion of some sort. This new breed of journalists had gone to college to study the news biz and had come out with the notion that they were not just reporters, hacks, nosy little bastards, but "professionals," complete with a code of conduct, some of which gutted the profession of it's prime purpose. Which was, as the old — original reporter's code described — 'to comfort the afflicted, and afflict the comfortable."

But that's changed now. The comfortable can be comfortable in the knowledge that all they have to do to neuter a critical expose on them is to have their lawyer issue a denial, which will be quoted, unchallenged, un-dissected, un-debunked in the same story. He said, she said. And the reader — left none the wiser for his or her reading efforts. And, readers now understand that reading the morning paper or watching cable news ain't gonna get them any closer to the truth, so they've turned to their own research... of sorts, as explained in a NYTimes piece, "Mining The Web for Feelings, Not Facts,"

Here's another excellent perspective on our national news deficit:

Truth' vs. 'facts' from America's media - Americans need the media to give us the truth in the healthcare debate.
by Neal Gabler

"Why don't we get the truth? Part of it, as I've said, is fear — fear that if journalists dispel the rumors they will be bashed by the right, which is implacably against the president's reforms no matter how much sense they make. Part of it is a lack of expertise. Most reporters are not equipped to quickly and authoritatively tell truth from spin on an issue such as healthcare. And part of it, frankly, is sheer laziness."

August 23, 2009 — T.S. Eliot was wrong. August is the cruelest month. As we head toward next month's congressional face-off on a national healthcare bill, the news media are infatuated with town hall meetings. Over and over, we see angry citizens screaming about a Big Government takeover of the healthcare system, shouting that they will lose their insurance or be forced to give up their doctors and denouncing "death panels" that will euthanize old people.
 


Of course, none of this is even remotely true. These are all canards peddled by insurance companies terrified of losing their power and profits, by right-wing militants terrified of a victory for the president they hate and by the Republican Party, which has been commandeered by the insurance industry and the militants. But the lies have obviously had their effect. Recent polls show that support for healthcare reform — reform that would insure more Americans, would force insurance companies to cover preexisting conditions and prevent them from capriciously terminating coverage, and would provide competition to drive down costs — is rapidly eroding.

Maybe Americans should know better. Maybe they shouldn't fall for the latest imbecilic propaganda and scare tactics. Maybe. But a citizenry is only as well-informed as the quality of information it receives. One can't expect Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck or Sarah Palin or the Republican Party or even the Democrats to provide serious, truthful assessments of a complex health plan. Truth has to come from somewhere else — from a reliable, objective, trustworthy source.

That source should be the media, and there has been, in fact, some excellent coverage of healthcare, especially by our better newspapers and especially lately when the untruths have become a torrent, rousing reporters to provide a corrective. But overall, the coverage has not been exactly edifying. According to the Pew Research Center, 16% of the stories in its media sample last week were devoted to healthcare, but three-quarters of that coverage was either about legislative politics or the town halls. Tom Rosenstiel, who heads Pew's Center for Excellence in Journalism, said that if the healthcare debate is a potential teaching moment, that "moment is passing us by."

Television particularly has been remiss, even without mentioning cable news, which may be the greatest source of disinformation. ABC took some heat from Republicans for giving President Obama a prime-time forum to answer questions about healthcare in June. But as far as I can tell, it is the only prime-time special that any broadcast network has devoted to the healthcare debate. Even so, rather than merely host the president, ABC should have had a variety of experts and qualified reporters assessing exactly what the proposed bills will and will not do and who is and is not telling the truth — a difficult but not impossible task.

To look at this in a larger context, journalists would no doubt say that it isn't really their job to ferret out the "truth." It is their job to report "facts." If Palin says that Obama intends to euthanize her child, they report it. If Limbaugh says that Obama's healthcare plan smacks of Nazism, they report it. And if riled citizens begin shouting down their representatives, they report it, and report it, and report it. The more noise and the bigger the controversy, the greater the coverage. This creates a situation in which not only is the truth subordinate to lies, but one in which shameless lies are actually privileged over reasoned debate.

Don't think the militants don't know this and take full advantage of it. They know that the media, especially the so-called liberal mainstream media — which are hardly liberal if assessed honestly — refrain from attempting to referee arguments for fear that they will be accused by the right of taking sides. So rather than be battered, the media — and I am talking about the respectable media, not the carnival barkers on cable — increasingly strive for the simplest sort of balance rather than real objectivity. They marshal facts, but they don't seek truth. They behave as if every argument must be heard and has equal merit, when some are simply specious. That is how global warming, WMD and "end of life" counseling have become part of silly reportorial ping-pong at best and badly misleading information at worst.

All of this is even more relevant given the death of media oracle Walter Cronkite several weeks ago. He achieved his legendary status, as many have observed, not because he was the reassuring avuncular voice of America, blandly reading the news, but because he was often its truth teller, upsetting our complacency. It was Cronkite who visited Vietnam and declared it a stalemate when nearly everyone else in the news media was gung-ho. And it was Cronkite who decided to take the Washington Post's reporting on Watergate and devote 14 minutes of his broadcast to it, thus dragging it from the sidelines into the national conversation. The truth is also relevant in light of a recent online poll that showed Jon Stewart as the nation's most trusted newsman. Stewart is, of course, a comedian, and the news media's incapacity to tell the truth, along with the idiocies and hypocrisies of our political leadership, are his running joke. What he does to politicians and to the media is exactly what the media should be doing to politicians and to one another.

It was because we didn't have a committed, truth-telling media that the country marched happily into Iraq, with tragic consequences that should have been foreseen. As media analyst Michael Massing discovered in his study of the prewar coverage, virtually the entire media, except for the McClatchy papers, reported the administration's rationale without devoting more than a few sentences or minutes to dissenting voices, much less doing their own analysis. It was because we didn't have a committed, truth-telling media that the country plunged off the economic cliff with so little warning. And it may very well be because we don't have a committed, truth-telling media that we will fail to get the healthcare reform we so desperately need.

Why don't we get the truth? Part of it, as I've said, is fear — fear that if journalists dispel the rumors they will be bashed by the right, which is implacably against the president's reforms no matter how much sense they make. Part of it is a lack of expertise. Most reporters are not equipped to quickly and authoritatively tell truth from spin on an issue such as healthcare. And part of it, frankly, is sheer laziness.

Telling the truth requires shoe leather. It requires digging up facts that aren't being handed to you, talking to experts, thinking hard about what you find. This isn't easy. It takes time and energy as well as guts, especially when there are conflicting studies, as there are on healthcare. But finally, we may not have a journalism of truth because we haven't demanded one. Many of us are invested in one side of the story; we are for Obama or against him, for healthcare reform or against it. These are a priori positions. Truth won't change them.

Yet the danger of not insisting on the truth in a brave new world of constant lies is that it subjects our policies to whichever side shouts the loudest or has the most money to spend to mislead us. That is likely to lead to disastrous governance: a needless war, a great recession, a continuation of a failing healthcare system.

What it comes down to is that sometimes the media have to tell the truth not because anyone really wants them to but because it is the right thing to do — the essential thing to do — for the sake of our democracy.

(Neal Gabler is the author, most recently, of "Walt Disney: The Triumph of the American Imagination.")

More from this author:
Predictions for 2007 (6809 Hits)
by Stephen P. Pizzo The War: Jenna & Barbara Bush will not be part of their dad's troop surge. Ditto for any member of the Cheney clan. ...
White House Chess (6368 Hits)
by Stephen P. Pizzo The Washington media spent the holidays trying to guess what the President's new plan for Iraq might be. Meanwhile in the...
Fine Mess You Got Us Into This Time (8001 Hits)
by Stephen P. Pizzo At the moment all the focus is on what George W. Bush is going to do about the mess he's made of Iraq. But the larger...
New Lies Forward (6247 Hits)
by Stephen P. Pizzo Well it's a new year, and you know what that means... time to update the administration's list of stated reasons for it's...
The GOP's Comprehensive Immigration Reform Scam (6814 Hits)
by Stephen P. Pizzo Traditional conservative, William F. Buckley was once asked how he would describe a “liberal.” He thought for...
Related Articles:
Swing Blades: Don Rumsfeld Bats Both Ways (11999 Hits)
In February 2003, I wrote a column for the Moscow Times detailing Don Rumsfeld's personal – and profitable – connection with North Korea's...
Wall Street Journal and New York Times Attack Journalism (5629 Hits)
by Stephen Lendman This article addresses two of the writer's favorite corporate media targets - the Wall Street Journal's far-right ...
Reality Check: Genuine Journalism Exposes Somali Horrors (5562 Hits)
by Chris Floyd Yesterday we examined the egregious distortions and outright lies that Jeffrey Gettleman of the New York Times employed in...
Both Ways - Kunstler (6715 Hits)
by James Kunstler It seems to me you can call the situation in Iraq a lot of things, but it's not a war. Not at this point, anyway. Call it an...
Africa Action Joins Over 60 African Organizations in Global Week of Action on Debt (7227 Hits)
(Washington, DC) – Today Africa Action called on the U.S. Executive Directors to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank to...


Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Trackback(0)
Comments (0)add comment

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

adsense

Top