In an article last week, I questioned the lack of journalistic outrage at Trump’s threats toward freedom of the press. It struck a nerve, so here I respond to reader comments.
—
Whenever one of my articles gets a good bit of reader feedback, I will try to respond to as many commenters as possible. It’s a way of showing my appreciation for the reader engagement (which I do appreciate!), but it’s also a way of having one of these fun, new-fangled e-conversations. And that’s what the Good Men Project is all about.
Last week, I wrote an article entitled “Hey Journalists: Where’s the Outrage?” In this bizarre election season, I have been shocked by many things, but perhaps none so much as the apathy journalists have shown when Trump threatens them and the safeguards of their profession.
Why won’t they stand up for themselves?
Here are what some readers have to say:
Tom Brechlin writes: “As far as I’m concerned, the media can take a flying leap ESPECIALLY mainstream who have done nothing except try to influence how people should think. Freedom of press my a**. Freedom to lie, misrepresent, twist… You name it, they do it. News is no longer news, they report their opinions and no more.”
It does feel this way, sometimes. I certainly think with the rise of networks like Fox and MSNBC, one watches knowing that there is a filtered spin put on reporting, conservative and liberal respectively. I also recall a conversation with a British journalist many years ago (England’s print media outlets are openly biased, and have been for some time) who claimed objectivity is humanly impossible – we all have political stances, so why not just admit and embrace them?
But the problem there is the difference between recognizing natural human bias and striving against it, as opposed to indulging personal preference in how one covers facts. Because facts are objective, and straight journalism should (in my view) get back to attempting to present the facts with as little editorial bias as possible.
But the problem there is the difference between recognizing natural human bias and striving against it, as opposed to indulging personal preference in how one covers facts.
|
Mark writes: “There is no such thing as freedom of the press. Unless you want to say they have the freedom to twist the news, report not on the facts but the innuendo. If it bleeds it leads. It is clear an agenda to shape the public opinion is there. On both sides it is a truth twisting tale of outright deception and not telling the whole story, nor do they intend to. You want freedom of the press? Then ditch every outlet EXCEPT USA Today…”
“If it bleeds it leads.” Unfortunately, this seems true to me. Since news outlets need ad revenue, they need lots of eyeballs. And we as humans have a real weakness for horror, scandal, and schadenfreude.
I don’t regularly read USA Today, but I think Mark is probably expressing appreciation for their editorial page tradition of juxtaposing two writers presenting both sides of an issue. One paper I do read that does much the same is The Washington Post. Over the course of the last year, they’ve gained a lot of respect from this writer, even compared to bigger outlets like the Wall Street Journal and The New York Times.
Mark also wrote: “By the way, I think it absolutely appalling that a significant number of Democrats would still vote for Hillary even if she were indicted, and don’t believe that should be a reason for her to drop out of the race. This reported today from a poll of Democrat voters. That’s disturbing. Not so much about Hillary but that liberal voters have no sense of ethics at all by a wide margin.”
Since I don’t know the poll Mark is referencing, I’ll take his word for it. And in a normal year, I think Hillary would be looking at pressure to suspend her campaign if indictment were looming, inevitable down the road. Many of my liberal friends are unenthused (to say the least) by her candidacy, and do not condone her email actions.
But perhaps Americans have reached a place where ethical concerns are not top priorities for them. Because, of course, Republican voters have expressed willingness to vote for Trump, a man who is on trial for fraud, and who just this past weekend made blatantly racist remarks (again) about how his trial judge cannot be trusted, due to his “Mexican heritage.”
These two are the “people’s choice,” so to speak. I am similarly appalled, Mark, but the disgust must be, it seems to this writer, doled out to both sides of the voting pool…
Jonathan G writes: “Trump ain’t got nothin’ on Obama. If they weren’t outraged by the case of James Risen [Rosen], or Abdulah Haider Shaye, then why be outraged now?”
I am familiar with the James Rosen case, a Fox reporter whose phone records were grabbed by the Justice Department in relation to a North Korea leak investigation. And I agree wholeheartedly with Jonathan, because that was an immense breach of privacy and protocol, and I am not sure why it didn’t get the attention I feel it deserved.
The Shaye case seems different to me, after reading about it. But since I am very new to his story, I won’t comment further.
John Anderson writes: “…I’m no fan of Trump, but I’ll vote for the person with the best chance of beating Clinton. I’m no fan of the media either and suspect most people aren’t. I really don’t mind and suspect many others don’t as well watching them get what’s coming to them…”
The media has given lots of reason for distrust. No argument here.
But if getting “what’s coming to them” entails a crackdown of freedom of the press, count me out. This country has depended, with its very survival, upon a wholly free journalistic enterprise that is committed – at least in theory – to standing up against abuse of power, no matter who is behind the curtain.
If Trump became president, and were to succeed in curtailing a journalist’s ability to write a story, simply because it criticizes a policy or pronouncement, then I am on the side of the journalist, no matter their political leanings.
G writes: “No, Mr. Anderson, the media is overwhelmingly conservative and is owned by wealthy people and corporations. Mr. Brechlin is right about the news is no longer news. Nowadays, they don’t bother to do their homework and outlet for the corporate and wealthy people interests. Fox news for a long time was the propaganda machine for the Republican party.”
Two points here. One, a majority of journalists identify as Independents, though of those who choose a political party, Dems outnumber Republicans by a ratio of 4 to 1. That seems to back up Anderson’s point.
Two, it is true that media outlets are owned by mega-wealthy people and/or their corporations. Rupert Murdoch, a known conservative, is the billionaire behind Fox News. That would seem to back up G’s point (as would viewing most of the programming offered on FN).
But there are plenty of wealthy liberals, such as Richard Branson, who also own or exert tremendous influence over other media outlets.
Does that mean donor interests might be overrepresented or defended in our media channels? Probably. You can try watching PBS to get away from that, or you can do what I do: listen and read to a range from both sides.
Mark also writes: “I can’t wait to hear the author when she gets older. As Winston Churchill said, any young man who is not a liberal has no heart. Any old man who is not a conservative either is stupid or didn’t have any life experience. He was right. I was there once. Am someplace now.”
I always like responding to that quote. Because I think I was a bit more conservative when I was younger, and find myself being less inclined toward that view as I get older. Weird! However, I do want to make clear that I am emphatically not a liberal, in the American sense of the word. Liberalism today has come to mean a range of things I do not always support, and rarely think merit the attention said issues tend to garner.
For instance, the fact that nearly 400 people were shot in May in Chicago should be headline news. But instead, we’re talking about Harambe, the Cincinnati zoo gorilla. That is indicative of the lunacy we find ourselves in, and a lot of that stems from a liberal insistence on valuing feelings over uncomfortable realities (black on black crime is not a hot topic liberal issue, which is too bad, since a life is a life… I wish we could stop politicizing everything, in other words).
And finally, Tom writes: “I don’t think these were the responses Jessicah anticipated.”
You can say that again.
I did think more people would express concern over Trump’s threat to freedom of the press, I suppose.
Boy, was I ever wrong.
Photo: UNClimateChange
A simple search of the web found this. Replicated many times. Composition of Congress, by Political Party, 1855–2017 D R 86th 1959–1961 98 64 34 — — 4363 283 153 — — 87th 1961–1963 100 64 36 — — 4374 262 175 — — 88th 1963–1965 100 67 33 — — 435 258 176 — 1 89th 1965–1967 100 68 32 — — 435 295 140 — — 90th 1967–1969 100 64 36 — — 435 248 187 — — 91st 1969–1971 100 58 42 — — 435 243 192 — — 92nd 1971–1973 100 54 44 2 — 435… Read more »
What does controlling Congress have to do with this article Mark? However, since you brought politics up, Geroge Bush, Jr, had zero and minus net job growth compare to Obama or any other president. You have many politicians bought and paid for by foreign countries. California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger used Chinese steel instead of American steel to repair the Bay Bridge and it was later found out he had stocks in the Chinese steel company that manufactured the bridge parts. Compare to George Soros, the Koch Brothers are using their financial power to controlled American society by controlling all levels… Read more »
>American Public being fed up with Republican Party
>Elected 246 Republicans to the House.
PICK ONE.
And those 246 Republicans have not done one thing to put America back to work. Name me one of them who dare cross the party line to put Americans back to work 8Ball.
“Americans are getting fed up with the Republican party in being a party for wealthy people and corporations.” I think there is some truth to this statement. What they are fed up with are Establishment Republicans. Hence, the increasing and rising numbers of Tea Party Republicans being elected to Congress. Remember, Eric Cantor, was NOT re-elected. He was defeated by a novice college professor. Also, we see nationwide the majority of states now have Republican Governors AND legislators. Why? Because, at the state level Republicans do not conduct themselves as many of the entrenched Establishment Republicans do. Also, at the… Read more »
Oh. And by the way, I see because of your thought and reasonableness your truthfulness has now been attacked by at least one writer, who is so far to the left to make their comments irrelevant for their open bias. You unfortunately didn’t say what they want you to say. Normal conservatives will never tolerate that block to speech and thought.
No Mark i was attacking guys like Mr. Anderson and guys like you, Brechlin and Anderson are so far right that your comments are irrelevant due to your bias.
What is a normal conservative? You can’t find one these days and even if you could find one, he/she spend more time blocking speech and thought. if normal conservatives were so concern about speech and thought, they would have never tolerated those lies and hate from Fox News and people like Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, O’Reilly and Limbaugh.
Yeah and those Republican governors have put their states into an economic disaster area. Shortly after Scott Walker got elected to governor, Wisconsin fell to number 49 out of the 50 states in terms of job growth and economic development. Republican governor Sam Brownback did the old tried and failed of trickle trickle down policies gutted Kansas and he got taken to court because the Kansas constitution stated that the Kansas government has to fully fund its schools: http://documentarystorm.com/bill-moyers-journal-buying-the-war/
Right back at you Mark.
This was a wonderful follow up Jessica. This is true journalism. Thank you. The problem I think is that the media believes they are writing unbiased, but won’t look within themselves to determine if it’s actually true, or if they are so bullied by the paycheck to disregard it. That and that we as a people have a deep respect and belief in the press telling us the truth, but as we’ve become, we only look at what supports our belief. USA today not only provides opposing viewpoints for the reader to ponder, but in general news they report the… Read more »
“But liberals can’t prove their being liberal enough”
Yeah, and conservatives are always trying to prove that they are conservative or hard core conservative; otherwise, they will not get any support from the Republican Party, Fox News, ALEC, the US Chamber of Commerce, and the Koch Brothers.
If the conservatives really care about corruption, then they should clean up their own party a long time ago and never have voted for the two Bushes, Reagan, Mitt Romney, Bob Dole, Mark Rubio, Mitch O’Connell, Newt Gringrich, Scott Walker, Rick Scott, Sam Brownback, etc.
The press really screwed it up in the first of election of Ronald Reagan when they announce that Reagan won despite the fact that the voting stations were still open in the Western states until 8:00 pm Pacific Standard Time because they were competing with each other to announce who won the election. If the press had done its jobs, they would have investigated the first and second elections of Bush, Jr., plus the Secretary of State of Florida and Ohio not doing their job properly when it came to being fair and impartial. Instead, they use their offices to… Read more »
:The older you get, the smarted your parents become.”
If that was true, many families would not have become so dysfunctional in the first place and things like child abuse and domestic violence would not even exist.
Most reporters are independent because due to the deregulation of the media, newspapers, magazines, radio stations, and TV stations have been brought up by corporations and wealthy people whereby, they have been eliminated or downsize and they fire a whole bunch of people, so it is impossible for any reporter to get a job in their profession. Mike Papantonio of Ring of Fire talked to a reporter (can’t recall his name) who stated that because of all these corporate takeovers, his fellow reporters have lost their jobs and many of these reporters came from the upper middle/wealthy class. It is… Read more »
“Republicans would still vote for their candidates even if they were indicted. Nancy Reagan was once worried about Reagan being impeached and if Reagan was impreached, many Republicans would still vote for him if the law had not been passed back in the 1940s limiting a president to two terms.”
I would challenge you to do some simple research. Use Google.
Do a Google search on the number of members of Congress who have gone to prison (or been indicted) in the past 40-50 years. See which party MOST of them they were from..
I await your search results…
I would challenge you to do a google search on the number of Congress who support sending white collar people including wealthy people with harsh prison sentences or who support crackdown on corporate crime. I await your search results.
Good job Jessicah. This brings to mind something that the Late Richard Daley said to the press. He told them to “print what I mean, not what I say.” Maybe that’s when the news media started to twist their stories so as to influence their readers on issues that would help their own and/or the agencies political gains. Ya have to wonder why a so called reputable journalist would need to lie or embellish the truth? “I did think more people would express concern over Trump’s threat to freedom of the press, I suppose ” Simply look at ” in… Read more »
I’ve become in a sense an ultra liberal. I favor hings to the left of lefties on some points like extending legal parental surrender to men. I was a lot more conservative when younger. I trace my political activism to the stripper pastie requirement that was popular in the 1990s. It’s not really true, but it usually gets a WTF or right on response depending on who I tell it to.
Yeah … WTF definitely came to mind.