This is a space for those who like and have supported Hillary Clinton, as we consider the way forward. Those who degrade her and her supporters will be met with recipes and pictures of pets.
Over the next several Mondays, time permitting, I’ll discuss several institutions that need reform in order for good government and progressive ideals to move forward. They’re such big topics that I won’t be able to cover them adequately in one diary, and will revisit them in the coming weeks.
Last week I discussed reforming the Electoral College. This week, I take a look at the nebulous concoction that played a role in securing Trump’s victory — the media. The problem with trying to reform the media is that it is so amorphous, we can assign it blame without knowing exactly who is at fault.
In order to create a media that acts responsibly, we need to figure out who we’re dealing with, then determine how to deal with them.
1. Identify the Players
The “media” is everything from straight-news sources to talk shows to hybrids of straight news and entertainment to propaganda networks with a splash of “news” thrown in.
Straight News
This includes newspapers like the New York Times and the Washington Post, as well as PBS, many local news programs, the Associated Press, and so-called “news networks” like CNN. They also have a corresponding online presence, usually a website. Obviously the difficulty is that almost none of these examples is straight news. Each has some so-called straight news and some editorializing.
Talk Shows/Gossip
Talk shows, from morning to late night, are generally supposed to be light and focused on entertainment, not news. Yet frequently, morning talk shows will include some news, and both morning and late night shows will include political guests and highly political commentary.
Talk shows can, and often do, veer into gossip. Usually that gossip is about celebrities, but in the case of the online magazine, Politico, the gossip is political.
Propaganda Networks
The most obvious among these is Fox News, but to some extent, MSNBC falls into this category. Both exist with the self-conscious goal of promoting a specific point of view, which means highlighting certain news over others. Both (especially Fox) also feature commentary heavily tilted toward that point of view, creating a heavily distorted field. The propaganda networks are aided by radio networks that often promote the same vision, as well as online websites.
Left-Leaning/Right-Leaning News
Left-leaning news sources like Washington Monthly and Mother Jones, as well as corresponding right-leaning news sources, have some things in common with propaganda networks above, in that they are coming from a specific point of view. However, unlike Fox News and some of MSNBC, they often have quality stories based on research and analysis.
Fake News
This is the most disturbing of all. Though propaganda networks dabble in fake news, usually adding fiction to a real news account, fake news is purposely designed to be fake and to fool people into believing something that is not true.
Social Media
Social media like Twitter and Facebook exist to spread information, though because they have little filter, they can be used as tools to spread propaganda and other misinformation.
Most of these sources are not owned and controlled by a private family, but a giant conglomerate that also has its fingers in multiple pies. Supposedly the news divisions are independent of the non-news divisions, but do we really know?
Who sits behind the “throne” of each source? What is that/are those people’s motivations? Sympathies? Learn this information, and you can target them more effectively.
2. Diagnose the Problem
As is likely already clear, there is not just one problem. In general, we want the following:
- Our news to be news — accurate, unbiased, thoughtful, thorough.
- When opinions are aired, we want them to be informed and clearly separate from the news items. We want to know the backgrounds of the people providing the opinions so that we can judge for ourselves whether they are given in good faith.
- We want entertainment to be properly separated from news, not for news and entertainment to be merged into “infotainment.”
What are our problems with the above sources?
Straight News
Rather than provide unbiased news, the so-called straight news sources seem to be caught in proverbial “both sids”ism, which leads them to distort one side (usually left/Democrats) to make it seem comparable to the other. Moreover, so-called straight news sources like New York Times adopt a specific tone to their news coverage that comes dangerously close to editorializing, even propagandizing.
The New York Times “news” division promoted George W. Bush’s Iraq War early and often. Remember Judith Miller? The news slant seemed more intent on promoting a specific goal than on providing accurate information to help the reader make an informed choice. Then during this past election, the New York Times appears to have made a conscious decision to be negative toward Hillary Clinton in a way that made her appear as equally disliked and corrupt as Donald Trump. While the New York Times has done some good journalism (such as the story about Trump not paying his taxes), often it was left to the New York Times’s editorial section to provide a sober critique of what was at stake during this election.
Meanwhile, the “unbiased, straight news” CNN hired Trump’s former campaign manager to be a commentator, while he was still on Trump’s payroll. And Associated Press articles, while appearing sober and unbiased, often contains simplistic, slanted coverage that is carried unquestioningly in countless newspapers across the country.
In short, too often the straight news is crafted to conform to a narrative, which makes it more like gossip and even propaganda. This is distressing when you rely on the straight news sources to get an accurate account of what is happening in the world.
Talk Shows/Gossip
While it is nice that talk shows wish to have some substance, too often serious issues are treated in a shallow fashion, discussed by talk show hosts who have very little grounding in the subject matter. They bring opinions to the news that, too often, are based on wrong assumptions.
Meanwhile, gossip magazines like Politico might have some good news stories, but too often they trivialize serious issues and blow up every disagreement, creating a distorted lens through which to view the political world. In essence, they reduce everyone to high school students.
Propaganda Networks
The problem is that they exist at all. Down the road, a new version of the Fairness Doctrine must be implemented so that network viewers and readers must be exposed to other cogent points of view.
Left-Leaning/Right-Leaning News
There is not much of a problem as long as they maintain their quality and integrity. The biggest problem may be that their funding sources are not robust.
Fake News
Obviously the problem is that it exists, and that it’s not self evident which is fake news (unless we’re dealing with obviously, cleverly fake news like The Onion) and which is real until after the story has been released. By then, it’s usually too late to change the opinions of many who have read it.
Social Media
The problem is that the unfiltered fake memes and propaganda/other fake news carry through the Internet, with nothing to counteract it unless users purposely make an effort to seek out another source. Too often, they don’t.
3. Create a Plan for Reform, and Execute It
To fix this problem, there will likely have to be many small fixes. They won’t erase the structural disadvantages posed by conglomerates controlling our news, but they could make things somewhat easier. Below are a few examples of fixes, by no means an exhaustive list.
- Choose a news source and target the advertisers. This is best known as the Rush Limbaugh approach. A determined campaign to get his advertisers to drop him has been hugely successful, and even though Limbaugh still has too much exposure, it is less than it once was.
- Create a steady campaign to complain to the Powers That Be of each news/media source. Catskill Julie frequently posts the contact information of various news media sources so we can complain. A steady stream of complaints to these sources regarding biased and/or irresponsible news, along with threats to call advertisers and boycott products, might spur them to rethink their coverage.
- Turn it off. Hate Morning Joe? Don’t watch. Same with Fox News and CNN. The bigger issue is that these news networks are turned on in numerous public spaces, from doctor’s offices to the ground floor of big office buildings. If it’s just on by default, as opposed to being an individual’s choice to watch (such as at the gym), go to the person in charge and request that the television station be changed. Tell them that it makes you uncomfortable, and you won’t patronize that establishment again unless they change the television channel to something more neutral. That will make it at least a little tougher for biased news to reach those who are not sophisticated news readers.
- Praise where praise is due. The same New York Times that obsessed about Hillary Clinton’s emails was the same New York Times that published the article about Trump’s tax dodges, and that publishes good commentators like Paul Krugman. We should praise specific articles that we think exemplify good news and analysis, so it doesn’t seem like we’re blanket-blaming the entire news source for the actions of one segment, which might make them less inclined to change.
- Reward sources of quality news and analysis with financial support. Here is the key. Quality news and analysis won’t always tell you things you like. We should be careful not to reward only news sources that tell us what we want to hear. We should reward sources that consistently work to provide news that is cogent and unbiased, and quality analysis, even if it’s not what we want to hear.
Finally, talk to friends and colleagues who get their news solely from Fox or who imbibe every meme on Facebook and Twitter. They may not change their minds, but exposure to another point of view will surely help more than any of us realize.
In honor of Hillary Clinton, let’s discuss how to make the impossible possible. Let’s discuss fixing the media. This is your open thread.