Sure we've all seen the lustre lost from professions once respected and now disdained: lawyer, politician, businessman and sometimes even policeman (given the many scandals). Those still (mostly) holding their head up high include school teachers, doctors and firefighters. But what about the fourth estate, probably the most important part of our democracy right after the Judicial branch? It
was thought that laws are the backbone of our society and while the Supreme Court keeps the lawmakers honest from the top, it has traditionally been the journalists that keep them honest from the bottom, as it were -- in the daily fight to find the truth and then deliver it to the people.
"An informed citizenry is the bulwark of democracy" Thomas Jefferson
So let's take a
look a recent study that shows how bad it's become for the press (near the bottom of the page). Not only has the esteem of the press dropped to the lowest of nearly all institutions, but the widely used excuse that "they are merely providing what the people want" is also shown to be without merit as most people (at least claim that they) don't like the way new is delivered.
Also of note in this same article is that the National Political Editor of The Washington Post ,
wrote a column acknowledging the extremely obvious truths about his "profession" -- that because they are obsessed with attracting traffic-generating links, they focus on empty trivialities at the expense of substantive news. As we've long noticed, everyone appears to be in a race to the bottom, landing somewhere between People magazine and the National Enquirer. How pathetic!
For an insider's opinion from a real journalist, everyone should read this
scathing expose by David Halberstam on today's American press -- in stark contrast with his 2005 speech to Columbia School of Journalism grads on what a real journalist should be.
But now that Big Media is focused solely on the bottom line, they can be easily manipulated by anything that threatens their profit. So they fall back on cheap reporting methods, little fact checking, fewer investigative reports, appeasing big advertisers, and avoiding offending anyone by staying away from hard hitting stories -- because that has to offend
someone --
too risky! Now they've neutered the news making it so bland that no one will complain, not the viewers, not the big companies ripping us who may stop advertising with them, and in the latest case they avoid asking difficult questions of our government fearing that they'll have their access removed. So instead, they have been indicted with the most flagrant abdication of their journalistic responsibilities -- and what does the news media say about it? Nothing; of course. That would make themselves look bad.
Even Bush's own Press Secretary mocks them for being weak, complicit little mouthpieces for government propaganda. Not only do they not even try to deny it, they don't even mention it! So to keep from losing even more viewers to the Internet, they can't even talk about what amounts to one of the biggest news stories of our time. And they call themselves newsmen? I hope that Walter Cronkite isn't watching this debacle as it will surely cause enough despair to send him to his grave.
I'm guessing that the big brass is pressuring them to sweep this under the rug and hope that it will go away. Sadly, it probably will get insufficient notice because we have been barraged with too many other scandals and we're all numb. But this one in particular is one of the worst. To know that we no longer have thousands of journalists throughout the globe looking out for the public good -- holding people accountable. Now who will do it?
Maybe other countries haven't turned their news people into craven pigs slurping at the trough of virtually all other businesses -- that of trading any integrity for a quick buck. The Internet is the last place where you can find news that isn't about the latest celebrity meltdown or some such other empty distraction.
So here's a chance for our "best and brightest" TV news anchors to tell it like it is. Unfortunately, it's obfuscated by some giggly reparte and then quickly gets pushed aside for some self-gratulatory pat on the backs about their fundraising efforts. Sad.
This Salon article does a great job shredding this encounter and clearly demonstrates the difference between vapid TV news and substantive Internet news.
So Katie Couric gets it right arguing that the media did fail to do its job -- pointing out that the White House threatened networks which were perceived to be too critical with cutting off access to the war. But the two bobble-heads next to her, especially the painfully empty-headed Charlie Gibson insists that the media did a perfectly fine job and that he would do nothing different.
I suspect that we'll look back at this time and realize that these last few years were the beginning of the end of REAL journalism -- at least in the mainstream. Since now Big Media only cares about following the money, the only journalists with any integrity will be working for small shops or blogging on the Internet.
For now, I'll see if BBC news still offers any hope. But what will the American people do?