"The media sucks!"
"The media lies!"
"Real journalism is dead!"
"You can't trust the media!"
We all hear these cries of frustration, anger and disappointment daily. Many of us say these things ourselves.
While some of this is hyperbole, there is some truth to these claims.
And, you know what? It is our fault!
As with everything we romanticize the past. We view the past with ahistorical and rose colored lens. Our perception of the media is no exception. Except in the case of the media the view of the past is more accurate than it is ahistorical.
We look back fondly upon figures like Edward R Murrow, Walter Cronkite or even more recent figures such as Helen Thomas and Sam Donaldson.
The media is supposed to be a check on the government and the powerful (in both the public and private sectors). The media's role is to be the link between the powerful and the people. Their primary function was/is designed to be society's tool to inform and educate the public.
And, that is why freedom of the press is expressly mentioned in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. The Founding Fathers having lived under tyrannical rule where freedom of the press wasn't adhered understood a free press that adequately informs the public is vital to the health and prosperity of a free nation.
The press' role in government and society is not to entertain the masses or acquiesce to the powerful and influential but to be adversarial and to hold us all accountable.
But, along the way the media has lost their stated purpose. They have lost their perspective.
The reason for this is simple. Today's media has been corporatized. They have become consumed with sensationalism. Informing the public and being a check on power has succumbed to profit margins.
And, we have let them.
Once large corporations began owning media outlets the news became more interested in kowtowing to corporate interests instead of informing the public and reporting the news whether we liked the news or not. That goes for broadcast, cable and local news. As with seemingly everything in today's world, the news has become partisan and serves as echo chambers rather than beacons of truth and information. The news is subjective and editorialized instead of being objective and factual.
Nowhere is this more evident than cable news. The arena of cable news in today's world is profit and ratings driven, but it was not always like that.
For the longest time only one cable news network existed, which was CNN. The network exploded onto the scene in the early to mid 1980s. During that time the partisan divide was not anywhere near as toxic and polarized as it is today.
While the difference between Republicans and Democrats was certainly distinct, the discourse was rather civil. The narrative set forth by CNN and the major network media outlets (NBC, ABC, and CBS) was not one of a corporatist or establishment mindset but one that generally focused on presenting facts and news gathering.
CNN, as the only cable news network, provided the public with 24 hour news. Because, unlike the other networks, their primary objective was to inform the public they were able to perform deeper dives into the news of the day. In contrast to the major broadcast networks they weren't restricted to a 30 minute evening broadcast or an one hour Sunday program.
CNN was not only able to provide updates on the current main news cycle but was able to provide journalistic information on worldwide events and news relaying how those things affected the United States and the United States involvement.
Because CNN was the sole cable news network they weren't in competition with anyone else, which gave them room to focus on the news and the facts.
However, as the mid-1990s approached other networks began springing up. CNBC, a subsidiary of NBC, was formed. Then in 1996 well-known political operative, Roger Ailes, with the financial backing of uber wealthy conservative businessman Rupert Murdoch formed Fox News.
Fox News was born as a counter to the Bill Clinton presidency. Ailes and Murdoch billed the network as an alternative to what they perceived as the liberal tilted mainstream media. Its purpose was to provide a conservative voice.
What Fox News really represented was the burgeoning political divide that appeared to be engulfing the political landscape.
Leading up to Fox News' formation Republicans for years had been propagating the media had a liberal bias. Now, that wasn't really the case, but Ailes had introduced the idea of a media outlet that propagandized the conservative viewpoint back in the 1970s when he was a member of the Richard Nixon administration.
Ailes vision was to create a news organization that literally controlled the narrative and in his mind would strengthen the Republican Party.
By the time the mid-90s came along the culture wars that symbolized the 1960s had essentially became mainstream.
In fairness to Ailes' beliefs the country had moved center-left. Minorities were viewed in a more positive light. African-Americans, although still significantly systematically marginalized, had became a part of the mainstream society's fabric. The LGBTQ community (still lacking some basic civil rights) was seeing their lifestyles becoming more tolerated, if not accepted.
And, for his many...many flaws Bill Clinton was a hugely popular president, which caused many on the right to fear they were losing power and their grasp on the American ideological identity.
However, a significant swath of the American public wasn't comfortable with any of this which gave Fox News a readymade audience. To their credit Fox News took advantage of this divide and provided a voice to those who feared and loathed this shift in the American mindset.
Reacting to the rise of Fox News NBC and Microsoft joined forces to create a new cable news network, MSNBC. Initially MSNBC was a center right channel. Its purpose was to cater more to the establishment, center-left Democrats and those Conservatives uncomfortable with the overt far right tilt of Fox.
Figures like Joe Scarborough and Tucker Carlson rose to prominence with nightly shows on the network. And, MSNBC gave a platform to former Nixon aide and presidential candidate, Pat Buchanan.
However, MSNBC also gave a platform to noted Progressives, Keith Olberman and Phil Donahue.
As the second decade of the 2000s approached MSNBC decided to go into a decided Democratic tilt. They gave shows to noted Progressive, Rachel Maddow, and liberal, Lawrence O'Donnell. They began featuring more center-left pundits and analysts. Eventually, they began tacitly presenting themselves as the network of the left, which of course was a contrast to Fox News who was becoming increasingly far rightwing and CNN who was the ultimate centrist network.
So, now, here we are today. We are in an extremely polarized political climate. A climate were either you're team blue or team red. Everything is politicized and partisan. And, news outlets whether it's cable news, newspapers or online outlets reflect that.
We are also in a climate where, as much information that is at our fingertips, many people are uninformed. Some are uninformed because their news sources simply don't report all the news. Others are uninformed because they are agnostic or apathetic about politics and choose to be uninformed.
Most mainstream news outlets aren't really reporting the news. They are simply acting as propaganda tools for their interests or are more concerned with entertaining than informing.
Certain news stories such as Russiagate or Hillary Clinton's emails are covered ad nauseam. Online outlets, mainstream newspapers and cable news obsess over stories that certainly have news value but are overhyped and not presented through objective lens.
The Russiagate story is a prime example. MSNBC used this story as a cudgel to tar the Trump presidency. Because they were well aware the majority of their audience loathed Trump and his administration MSNBC built their entire programming around the Mueller investigation. Rachel Maddow made Russiagate the centerpiece of her show every night. Now, in fairness she did cover other stories (which usually were tangentially connected to Trump and/or Russia), but the imbalance was prominent. In fact, although I love Maddow, I stopped watching her show routinely because Russia was all she talked about. It was to the point she would rehash stories she'd previously covered providing little, if any, new details.
In contrast Fox News didn't obsess over the Mueller investigation. Instead they pretended like it largely didn't exist as far as any potential wrongdoing Trump did. Instead they chose to propagate unsubstantiated conspiracy theories about Special Counsel Robert Mueller, the Democrats and the FBI.
Also, they distracted from the investigation by annoyingly bringing up Hillary Clinton's email scandal.
The problem with all of this besides the obvious disinformation and innuendo that both sides were propagating is that other important and salient stories were being ignored. For example, the war and genocide in Yemen received almost no coverage. The President's apparent emoluments violations was barely spoken about and Fox never covered it. The full length New York Times article back in the fall on the Trump families extensive history of tax fraud and the revelation about how Donald Trump actually obtained his wealth received one day of coverage (barely). Not to mention not one deep dive has been performed on an economy that has great numbers but no tangible evidence peoples lives are better.
The media is failing us as citizens. But, it's our fault.
In the current corporate media profit margins is all that matters. Money is made through advertising. Advertisers are only going to buy ad time if there are ratings.
Fact is ratings are good for cable news, subscriptions are up for the New York Times and Washington Post and website hits are soaring for online news outlets. In other words people are watching and reading the current iterations of the news.
Due to her over the top Russiagate coverage Rachel Maddow soared to the top of the nightly cable news ratings. Folks like Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson of Fox are right behind her despite their vacuous subjective news absent programming. In fact, Fox News which can barely be called a serious news outlet is a permanent fixture atop the ratings.
The viewing public is culpable for this. Why should any of these outlets feel pressure to present serious national and world news when the more sensational stories and drastically partisan editorials are what obviously attracts people?
Most of us fancy ourselves serious people who want real journalism, but that isn't true. We love to lambaste the media for their superficiality and lack of objectivity. However, the reality is the corporate media is about making money and if stories on the genocide in Yemen attracted viewers that is what they would be airing. If Fox viewers wanted objective coverage of the President and his administration (even if they love him) Shep Smith and Brett Baier would be getting far superior ratings over the hacks Fox has in primetime. That is not the case though.
Even YouTube shows like The Young Turks and Secular Talk, who cover the gauntlet of national and world news, admit the videos that obtain the most views are the ones about Stormy Daniels and Trump's second rate lounge comic act foolishness. And, those shows' audiences are objectively more informed and nuanced about the news.
We live in a society where people are certainly busy and hustling to make ends meet. But, it's beyond me folks won't take 30 minutes to watch or read some informative news so they can be apprised of what is going on in their community, their nation and their world. I know they can't say they don't have time because they'll scan the interwebs for the latest tea on Khloe Kardashian or Wendy Williams.
And, I get it. Our lives are so stressful and over wrought. We need a break and don't want to think. It is why I watch what some call "trash tv". I just need to watch some unadulterated fuckery and ostensibly non-serious programming that doesn't require me to think nor comprehend. But, I watch and read plenty of news because I not only want to be informed I feel it's my responsibility.
Yes, the media sucks. However, I don't believe the vast majority of journalists are "fake news" or aren't serious. I do believe journalism is still a noble and necessary profession. It has just lost its way.
But, I also believe as it's the media's job to be a check on the powerful and influential it's our job to be a check on the press. We can't do that by justifying their lackluster coverage and cursory reporting on important issues by only paying attention to sensationalism and crap. We must demand more. If we stop watching, reading and listening to the tabloidization then they'll stop doing it. Why? Because advertisers won't buy ads on programming nobody is watching.
You want the media to do better? Then demand it by being serious people who want serious objective journalism.
"The media lies!"
"Real journalism is dead!"
"You can't trust the media!"
We all hear these cries of frustration, anger and disappointment daily. Many of us say these things ourselves.
While some of this is hyperbole, there is some truth to these claims.
And, you know what? It is our fault!
As with everything we romanticize the past. We view the past with ahistorical and rose colored lens. Our perception of the media is no exception. Except in the case of the media the view of the past is more accurate than it is ahistorical.
We look back fondly upon figures like Edward R Murrow, Walter Cronkite or even more recent figures such as Helen Thomas and Sam Donaldson.
The media is supposed to be a check on the government and the powerful (in both the public and private sectors). The media's role is to be the link between the powerful and the people. Their primary function was/is designed to be society's tool to inform and educate the public.
And, that is why freedom of the press is expressly mentioned in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. The Founding Fathers having lived under tyrannical rule where freedom of the press wasn't adhered understood a free press that adequately informs the public is vital to the health and prosperity of a free nation.
The press' role in government and society is not to entertain the masses or acquiesce to the powerful and influential but to be adversarial and to hold us all accountable.
But, along the way the media has lost their stated purpose. They have lost their perspective.
The reason for this is simple. Today's media has been corporatized. They have become consumed with sensationalism. Informing the public and being a check on power has succumbed to profit margins.
And, we have let them.
Once large corporations began owning media outlets the news became more interested in kowtowing to corporate interests instead of informing the public and reporting the news whether we liked the news or not. That goes for broadcast, cable and local news. As with seemingly everything in today's world, the news has become partisan and serves as echo chambers rather than beacons of truth and information. The news is subjective and editorialized instead of being objective and factual.
Nowhere is this more evident than cable news. The arena of cable news in today's world is profit and ratings driven, but it was not always like that.
For the longest time only one cable news network existed, which was CNN. The network exploded onto the scene in the early to mid 1980s. During that time the partisan divide was not anywhere near as toxic and polarized as it is today.
While the difference between Republicans and Democrats was certainly distinct, the discourse was rather civil. The narrative set forth by CNN and the major network media outlets (NBC, ABC, and CBS) was not one of a corporatist or establishment mindset but one that generally focused on presenting facts and news gathering.
CNN, as the only cable news network, provided the public with 24 hour news. Because, unlike the other networks, their primary objective was to inform the public they were able to perform deeper dives into the news of the day. In contrast to the major broadcast networks they weren't restricted to a 30 minute evening broadcast or an one hour Sunday program.
CNN was not only able to provide updates on the current main news cycle but was able to provide journalistic information on worldwide events and news relaying how those things affected the United States and the United States involvement.
Because CNN was the sole cable news network they weren't in competition with anyone else, which gave them room to focus on the news and the facts.
However, as the mid-1990s approached other networks began springing up. CNBC, a subsidiary of NBC, was formed. Then in 1996 well-known political operative, Roger Ailes, with the financial backing of uber wealthy conservative businessman Rupert Murdoch formed Fox News.
Fox News was born as a counter to the Bill Clinton presidency. Ailes and Murdoch billed the network as an alternative to what they perceived as the liberal tilted mainstream media. Its purpose was to provide a conservative voice.
What Fox News really represented was the burgeoning political divide that appeared to be engulfing the political landscape.
Leading up to Fox News' formation Republicans for years had been propagating the media had a liberal bias. Now, that wasn't really the case, but Ailes had introduced the idea of a media outlet that propagandized the conservative viewpoint back in the 1970s when he was a member of the Richard Nixon administration.
Ailes vision was to create a news organization that literally controlled the narrative and in his mind would strengthen the Republican Party.
By the time the mid-90s came along the culture wars that symbolized the 1960s had essentially became mainstream.
In fairness to Ailes' beliefs the country had moved center-left. Minorities were viewed in a more positive light. African-Americans, although still significantly systematically marginalized, had became a part of the mainstream society's fabric. The LGBTQ community (still lacking some basic civil rights) was seeing their lifestyles becoming more tolerated, if not accepted.
And, for his many...many flaws Bill Clinton was a hugely popular president, which caused many on the right to fear they were losing power and their grasp on the American ideological identity.
However, a significant swath of the American public wasn't comfortable with any of this which gave Fox News a readymade audience. To their credit Fox News took advantage of this divide and provided a voice to those who feared and loathed this shift in the American mindset.
Reacting to the rise of Fox News NBC and Microsoft joined forces to create a new cable news network, MSNBC. Initially MSNBC was a center right channel. Its purpose was to cater more to the establishment, center-left Democrats and those Conservatives uncomfortable with the overt far right tilt of Fox.
Figures like Joe Scarborough and Tucker Carlson rose to prominence with nightly shows on the network. And, MSNBC gave a platform to former Nixon aide and presidential candidate, Pat Buchanan.
However, MSNBC also gave a platform to noted Progressives, Keith Olberman and Phil Donahue.
As the second decade of the 2000s approached MSNBC decided to go into a decided Democratic tilt. They gave shows to noted Progressive, Rachel Maddow, and liberal, Lawrence O'Donnell. They began featuring more center-left pundits and analysts. Eventually, they began tacitly presenting themselves as the network of the left, which of course was a contrast to Fox News who was becoming increasingly far rightwing and CNN who was the ultimate centrist network.
So, now, here we are today. We are in an extremely polarized political climate. A climate were either you're team blue or team red. Everything is politicized and partisan. And, news outlets whether it's cable news, newspapers or online outlets reflect that.
We are also in a climate where, as much information that is at our fingertips, many people are uninformed. Some are uninformed because their news sources simply don't report all the news. Others are uninformed because they are agnostic or apathetic about politics and choose to be uninformed.
Most mainstream news outlets aren't really reporting the news. They are simply acting as propaganda tools for their interests or are more concerned with entertaining than informing.
Certain news stories such as Russiagate or Hillary Clinton's emails are covered ad nauseam. Online outlets, mainstream newspapers and cable news obsess over stories that certainly have news value but are overhyped and not presented through objective lens.
The Russiagate story is a prime example. MSNBC used this story as a cudgel to tar the Trump presidency. Because they were well aware the majority of their audience loathed Trump and his administration MSNBC built their entire programming around the Mueller investigation. Rachel Maddow made Russiagate the centerpiece of her show every night. Now, in fairness she did cover other stories (which usually were tangentially connected to Trump and/or Russia), but the imbalance was prominent. In fact, although I love Maddow, I stopped watching her show routinely because Russia was all she talked about. It was to the point she would rehash stories she'd previously covered providing little, if any, new details.
In contrast Fox News didn't obsess over the Mueller investigation. Instead they pretended like it largely didn't exist as far as any potential wrongdoing Trump did. Instead they chose to propagate unsubstantiated conspiracy theories about Special Counsel Robert Mueller, the Democrats and the FBI.
Also, they distracted from the investigation by annoyingly bringing up Hillary Clinton's email scandal.
The problem with all of this besides the obvious disinformation and innuendo that both sides were propagating is that other important and salient stories were being ignored. For example, the war and genocide in Yemen received almost no coverage. The President's apparent emoluments violations was barely spoken about and Fox never covered it. The full length New York Times article back in the fall on the Trump families extensive history of tax fraud and the revelation about how Donald Trump actually obtained his wealth received one day of coverage (barely). Not to mention not one deep dive has been performed on an economy that has great numbers but no tangible evidence peoples lives are better.
The media is failing us as citizens. But, it's our fault.
In the current corporate media profit margins is all that matters. Money is made through advertising. Advertisers are only going to buy ad time if there are ratings.
Fact is ratings are good for cable news, subscriptions are up for the New York Times and Washington Post and website hits are soaring for online news outlets. In other words people are watching and reading the current iterations of the news.
Due to her over the top Russiagate coverage Rachel Maddow soared to the top of the nightly cable news ratings. Folks like Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson of Fox are right behind her despite their vacuous subjective news absent programming. In fact, Fox News which can barely be called a serious news outlet is a permanent fixture atop the ratings.
The viewing public is culpable for this. Why should any of these outlets feel pressure to present serious national and world news when the more sensational stories and drastically partisan editorials are what obviously attracts people?
Most of us fancy ourselves serious people who want real journalism, but that isn't true. We love to lambaste the media for their superficiality and lack of objectivity. However, the reality is the corporate media is about making money and if stories on the genocide in Yemen attracted viewers that is what they would be airing. If Fox viewers wanted objective coverage of the President and his administration (even if they love him) Shep Smith and Brett Baier would be getting far superior ratings over the hacks Fox has in primetime. That is not the case though.
Even YouTube shows like The Young Turks and Secular Talk, who cover the gauntlet of national and world news, admit the videos that obtain the most views are the ones about Stormy Daniels and Trump's second rate lounge comic act foolishness. And, those shows' audiences are objectively more informed and nuanced about the news.
We live in a society where people are certainly busy and hustling to make ends meet. But, it's beyond me folks won't take 30 minutes to watch or read some informative news so they can be apprised of what is going on in their community, their nation and their world. I know they can't say they don't have time because they'll scan the interwebs for the latest tea on Khloe Kardashian or Wendy Williams.
And, I get it. Our lives are so stressful and over wrought. We need a break and don't want to think. It is why I watch what some call "trash tv". I just need to watch some unadulterated fuckery and ostensibly non-serious programming that doesn't require me to think nor comprehend. But, I watch and read plenty of news because I not only want to be informed I feel it's my responsibility.
Yes, the media sucks. However, I don't believe the vast majority of journalists are "fake news" or aren't serious. I do believe journalism is still a noble and necessary profession. It has just lost its way.
But, I also believe as it's the media's job to be a check on the powerful and influential it's our job to be a check on the press. We can't do that by justifying their lackluster coverage and cursory reporting on important issues by only paying attention to sensationalism and crap. We must demand more. If we stop watching, reading and listening to the tabloidization then they'll stop doing it. Why? Because advertisers won't buy ads on programming nobody is watching.
You want the media to do better? Then demand it by being serious people who want serious objective journalism.
