Today's media has lost sight of what its primary function in our democracy is.
The mainstream media has become obsessed with this false philosophy of being "fair and balanced". The role of a free press is not to be fair but objective.
The Founding Fathers believed in the essential need of an unmoored free press, which is why it is listed in the First Amendment of the Constitution. But, they didn't believe the press should be free but adversarial. They steadfastly believed that a truly free democratic republic could not be maintained without a free press.
The press is supposed to be the link between the people and its government. The press is to be the truth teller to the public and be a check on power whether it be government or the private sector.
But, above all the press is to be the arbiters of truth. The media job is to present objective facts.
Somewhere along the line the media and the public have forgotten that.
We live in a time where our society is polarized. We are polarized because we live in bubbles that make us feel safe. We are not interested in reading or hearing truth unless it is "our" truth.
Facts have become subjective. Yelling and whining have become the methods of choice to manipulate reality.
Unfortunately, the mainstream media has succumbed to the complaining.
For the last 30 plus years the press has been bombarded with claims of being "biased" and "left wing". To be fair the accusation of being biased have persisted since the press' inception. However, in the last 30 years the political class (especially the right) have weaponized the assertions.
As a result, the media has began kowtowing to pushback against the narrative. Also, corporations buying media outlets have somewhat compromised journalistic practices.
The media is obsessed with the notion of being "fair and balanced". However, this notion is unrealistic and contradictory to journalism ethics.
Good reporters simply relay the facts. Facts are tangible and objective. They are not fair. In fact, they are often unfair.
Now, I am going to make this crystal clear. The vast majority of reporters and news hosts convey facts. They tell an objective truth. But, in their misguided attempt to be fair they step all over the truth leading to doubts about their credibility.
This is what drives me crazy about the mainstream press regardless if it's print or television.
I believe the New York Times and the Washington Post along with the majority of the other large newspapers produce good work. But, they crap on it by not staying objective.
The Times and the Post are the worst at this. They will produce a well written, well sourced article about a politician or political figure that its constitution is tangible facts. They will seek out a response from the article's subject . That subject will answer questions but the answers are provably false.
Here is what drives me insane. They will just leave let the answers lie there without pushback or context all in the name of being balanced. No, it's the journalist's job to pushback on the answers and demand forthrightness.
Cable news, in particular, CNN is even worse.
What amuses me to no end is the way the President and his supporters constantly rail against CNN for being "fake news" and being "biased". It is such an asinine assertion. Nobody goes out of their way more to be "fair" than CNN.
I have seen innumerable times a Trump supporter go on a CNN show telling boldface lies. They make disingenuous or misleading statements. More often than not the anchor whether it be Brooke Baldwin, Erin Burnett, Anderson Cooper will just allow the Trump pundit to say tangible falsehoods without any substantial pushback.
That is awful journalism. Their job is not be equitable. Their job is to uphold the truth. So, when someone whether they be liberal or conservative is lying or misleading it's the duty of the reporter to fact check them.
Why does this nonsense take place? Well, it's because of money.
Republicans are always crying about the media being liberal, but they aren't. I'll concede the majority of reporters are left leaning. Not as much as you may think though. And, although the majority of reporters may be liberal, their bosses are not.
Most mainstream media is owned by corporations; thus, the media is corporatists.
The desire for truth has been replaced by the desire for access and sponsors.
A time existed in America the press sought the truth regardless of whom may be exposed or whose careers may be damaged. Journalists weren't swayed by conglomerates or the military complex. But, times have changed.
Like with most things in our society, profit margin dictates the manner in which things are done. Journalists straddle the line of being purveyors of truth while not pissing off their bosses or those in power.
It is the reason Devin Nunes can go on Fox News lying out his ass and Bret Baier nor Brit Hume provide any real resistance. It is the reason Nancy Pelosi can go on MSNBC blatantly lying and even take uncalled for dishonest cheap shots at NBC News while a great journalist like Jonathan Capehart just nods and smiles. All of the aforementioned are excellent journalists but they know if they display any actual contradiction they could feel management's wrath because management will feel the wrath of viewers and sponsors. Also, they may lose access to that particular politician.
This ideal the press holds that it must live up to this impossible and antithetical standard of being balanced is asinine. This fear of being stigmatized "liberal" is simply illogical.
First of all, it's an effort made in vain. Right-wingers will always label the press "far-left" when they receive negative coverage. Left-wingers will always label the press "biased" when they receive negative coverage. So, the press should just stick to its principles and be objective.
The reality is not only is it fruitless for the media to play it down the middle it will always backfire. They come across as disingenuous which in some folks' view is the same as being dishonest and biased.
Here is an example. Recently, CNN's Chris Cuomo and Don Lemon did commentaries on Antifa. Their commentaries left an impression with some that they're Antifa sympathizers. They are not but the impression they gave was because of their inane affinity for fairness.
Both men's argument was that Antifa's stated purpose is to fight fascism, racism and bigotry. That is objectively true.
They contended Antifa's ideology in principle is not morally equivalent to that of White Nationalists, Klansmen or Neo-Nazis. Again, that is objectively true.
But, where they ran into trouble was their neglect or at least soft-peddling of Antifa's methods. Antifa believes in violence (at least to some extent) as a means of achieving their goals. Antifa has at various times performed violence in the acts of destroying property and harassment.
In both cases when people from the right (justifiably so) pointed out the failure to mention this they defended themselves by saying they are not being apologists for Antifa. Then, as right-wingers are inclined to do they directly associated Antifa with Democrats. Instead of fact checking these people they gave mealy-mouthed responses which seemed to be making more excuses for Antifa and allowing a false narrative to exist.
Now, I want to stress I think both men are exceptional journalists but in their unavailing efforts to be fair they looked ridiculous and pissed off everyone in the process and failed miserably at being objective.
What they should've done is make the valid point what Antifa stands for is empirically more morally palatable than what the Alt-Right stands for, but also make the point Antifa's methods are violent which is almost always counterproductive. They should have also stringently stressed that Antifa has been not been endorsed or supported by any Democratic officials or liberal leaders. These are objective truths.
Now, I want to emphasize I am not saying there isn't a place for conjecture, opinion and analysis because there certainly is. But, it must be made clear that is what's being presented.
There is a place for the Sean Hannitys and Lawrence O'Donnells of the world. When I watch them I am not expecting objectivity because they are not bound to it. They don't refer to themselves as journalists.
People don't trust the media. There are plenty of reasons why that is. But, one of the biggest is because people don't believe them.
They don't believe them, in part, because they are not consistently objective in their reporting. As I said earlier, they will list a litany of facts and then refuse to hold people accountable when they lie about those facts. Because, they don't want to appear biased.
What the media doesn't seem to understand or simply don't care is that when they do not contradict falsehoods they're undermining their own reporting. They are giving the impression they don't believe in their work.
If I report Billy Bob is hitting the pipe twice a day and declare it fact because I have credible sourcing, but I refuse to contradict Billy Bob when he denies it then that would give the impression either I don't have faith in my story or I am lying. Truth is neither are true; I am just trying to be "fair and balanced". But, what I am actually doing is undermining my own story because I don't want to seem biased. Doesn't that sound silly?
For our democracy to thrive we need an adversarial free objective press. We can have sycophants and "advocate journalists" which is the bullshit Sean Hannity calls himself.
However, the rank and file press corps has a responsibility to the truth. They should not be beholden to corporate interests or folks' irrational need to be right and feel vindicated in their own feelings, beliefs and prejudices.
The media's job is to inform the masses and keep a check on power whether the masses or the power wants them to or not.
I want to touch on one more thing which somewhat has to do with this topic, the media being "liberal".
The media is not liberal. The media is corporatist which means they're establishment.
For my conservative friends who think the media is some arm of the left-wing you might be shocked to know what the actual left-wing thinks about that. I implore you to go on YouTube and watch multiple videos of The Young Turks, Secular Talk, The Majority Report, The Humanist Report and The Rational National and see what they think of the mainstream media. They're distrust of the media is about the same level as yours. Y'all think MSNBC is the "liberal" channel? Tell me if you still think that after watching some of these videos.
Anyway, the media has to stop caring what people and politicians think. They need to do their jobs. Report the facts-not your facts or my facts but the objective tangible truth!
The mainstream media has become obsessed with this false philosophy of being "fair and balanced". The role of a free press is not to be fair but objective.
The Founding Fathers believed in the essential need of an unmoored free press, which is why it is listed in the First Amendment of the Constitution. But, they didn't believe the press should be free but adversarial. They steadfastly believed that a truly free democratic republic could not be maintained without a free press.
The press is supposed to be the link between the people and its government. The press is to be the truth teller to the public and be a check on power whether it be government or the private sector.
But, above all the press is to be the arbiters of truth. The media job is to present objective facts.
Somewhere along the line the media and the public have forgotten that.
We live in a time where our society is polarized. We are polarized because we live in bubbles that make us feel safe. We are not interested in reading or hearing truth unless it is "our" truth.
Facts have become subjective. Yelling and whining have become the methods of choice to manipulate reality.
Unfortunately, the mainstream media has succumbed to the complaining.
For the last 30 plus years the press has been bombarded with claims of being "biased" and "left wing". To be fair the accusation of being biased have persisted since the press' inception. However, in the last 30 years the political class (especially the right) have weaponized the assertions.
As a result, the media has began kowtowing to pushback against the narrative. Also, corporations buying media outlets have somewhat compromised journalistic practices.
The media is obsessed with the notion of being "fair and balanced". However, this notion is unrealistic and contradictory to journalism ethics.
Good reporters simply relay the facts. Facts are tangible and objective. They are not fair. In fact, they are often unfair.
Now, I am going to make this crystal clear. The vast majority of reporters and news hosts convey facts. They tell an objective truth. But, in their misguided attempt to be fair they step all over the truth leading to doubts about their credibility.
This is what drives me crazy about the mainstream press regardless if it's print or television.
I believe the New York Times and the Washington Post along with the majority of the other large newspapers produce good work. But, they crap on it by not staying objective.
The Times and the Post are the worst at this. They will produce a well written, well sourced article about a politician or political figure that its constitution is tangible facts. They will seek out a response from the article's subject . That subject will answer questions but the answers are provably false.
Here is what drives me insane. They will just leave let the answers lie there without pushback or context all in the name of being balanced. No, it's the journalist's job to pushback on the answers and demand forthrightness.
Cable news, in particular, CNN is even worse.
What amuses me to no end is the way the President and his supporters constantly rail against CNN for being "fake news" and being "biased". It is such an asinine assertion. Nobody goes out of their way more to be "fair" than CNN.
I have seen innumerable times a Trump supporter go on a CNN show telling boldface lies. They make disingenuous or misleading statements. More often than not the anchor whether it be Brooke Baldwin, Erin Burnett, Anderson Cooper will just allow the Trump pundit to say tangible falsehoods without any substantial pushback.
That is awful journalism. Their job is not be equitable. Their job is to uphold the truth. So, when someone whether they be liberal or conservative is lying or misleading it's the duty of the reporter to fact check them.
Why does this nonsense take place? Well, it's because of money.
Republicans are always crying about the media being liberal, but they aren't. I'll concede the majority of reporters are left leaning. Not as much as you may think though. And, although the majority of reporters may be liberal, their bosses are not.
Most mainstream media is owned by corporations; thus, the media is corporatists.
The desire for truth has been replaced by the desire for access and sponsors.
A time existed in America the press sought the truth regardless of whom may be exposed or whose careers may be damaged. Journalists weren't swayed by conglomerates or the military complex. But, times have changed.
Like with most things in our society, profit margin dictates the manner in which things are done. Journalists straddle the line of being purveyors of truth while not pissing off their bosses or those in power.
It is the reason Devin Nunes can go on Fox News lying out his ass and Bret Baier nor Brit Hume provide any real resistance. It is the reason Nancy Pelosi can go on MSNBC blatantly lying and even take uncalled for dishonest cheap shots at NBC News while a great journalist like Jonathan Capehart just nods and smiles. All of the aforementioned are excellent journalists but they know if they display any actual contradiction they could feel management's wrath because management will feel the wrath of viewers and sponsors. Also, they may lose access to that particular politician.
This ideal the press holds that it must live up to this impossible and antithetical standard of being balanced is asinine. This fear of being stigmatized "liberal" is simply illogical.
First of all, it's an effort made in vain. Right-wingers will always label the press "far-left" when they receive negative coverage. Left-wingers will always label the press "biased" when they receive negative coverage. So, the press should just stick to its principles and be objective.
The reality is not only is it fruitless for the media to play it down the middle it will always backfire. They come across as disingenuous which in some folks' view is the same as being dishonest and biased.
Here is an example. Recently, CNN's Chris Cuomo and Don Lemon did commentaries on Antifa. Their commentaries left an impression with some that they're Antifa sympathizers. They are not but the impression they gave was because of their inane affinity for fairness.
Both men's argument was that Antifa's stated purpose is to fight fascism, racism and bigotry. That is objectively true.
They contended Antifa's ideology in principle is not morally equivalent to that of White Nationalists, Klansmen or Neo-Nazis. Again, that is objectively true.
But, where they ran into trouble was their neglect or at least soft-peddling of Antifa's methods. Antifa believes in violence (at least to some extent) as a means of achieving their goals. Antifa has at various times performed violence in the acts of destroying property and harassment.
In both cases when people from the right (justifiably so) pointed out the failure to mention this they defended themselves by saying they are not being apologists for Antifa. Then, as right-wingers are inclined to do they directly associated Antifa with Democrats. Instead of fact checking these people they gave mealy-mouthed responses which seemed to be making more excuses for Antifa and allowing a false narrative to exist.
Now, I want to stress I think both men are exceptional journalists but in their unavailing efforts to be fair they looked ridiculous and pissed off everyone in the process and failed miserably at being objective.
What they should've done is make the valid point what Antifa stands for is empirically more morally palatable than what the Alt-Right stands for, but also make the point Antifa's methods are violent which is almost always counterproductive. They should have also stringently stressed that Antifa has been not been endorsed or supported by any Democratic officials or liberal leaders. These are objective truths.
Now, I want to emphasize I am not saying there isn't a place for conjecture, opinion and analysis because there certainly is. But, it must be made clear that is what's being presented.
There is a place for the Sean Hannitys and Lawrence O'Donnells of the world. When I watch them I am not expecting objectivity because they are not bound to it. They don't refer to themselves as journalists.
People don't trust the media. There are plenty of reasons why that is. But, one of the biggest is because people don't believe them.
They don't believe them, in part, because they are not consistently objective in their reporting. As I said earlier, they will list a litany of facts and then refuse to hold people accountable when they lie about those facts. Because, they don't want to appear biased.
What the media doesn't seem to understand or simply don't care is that when they do not contradict falsehoods they're undermining their own reporting. They are giving the impression they don't believe in their work.
If I report Billy Bob is hitting the pipe twice a day and declare it fact because I have credible sourcing, but I refuse to contradict Billy Bob when he denies it then that would give the impression either I don't have faith in my story or I am lying. Truth is neither are true; I am just trying to be "fair and balanced". But, what I am actually doing is undermining my own story because I don't want to seem biased. Doesn't that sound silly?
For our democracy to thrive we need an adversarial free objective press. We can have sycophants and "advocate journalists" which is the bullshit Sean Hannity calls himself.
However, the rank and file press corps has a responsibility to the truth. They should not be beholden to corporate interests or folks' irrational need to be right and feel vindicated in their own feelings, beliefs and prejudices.
The media's job is to inform the masses and keep a check on power whether the masses or the power wants them to or not.
I want to touch on one more thing which somewhat has to do with this topic, the media being "liberal".
The media is not liberal. The media is corporatist which means they're establishment.
For my conservative friends who think the media is some arm of the left-wing you might be shocked to know what the actual left-wing thinks about that. I implore you to go on YouTube and watch multiple videos of The Young Turks, Secular Talk, The Majority Report, The Humanist Report and The Rational National and see what they think of the mainstream media. They're distrust of the media is about the same level as yours. Y'all think MSNBC is the "liberal" channel? Tell me if you still think that after watching some of these videos.
Anyway, the media has to stop caring what people and politicians think. They need to do their jobs. Report the facts-not your facts or my facts but the objective tangible truth!
