Articles about news media bias have been done ad nauseum. I’m not going down that road. I have something much more important to discuss — media credibility. Media bias is disturbing, but not relevant. Professionalism and standards are central to credibility. If news media are credible and their reportage is honest, the information they convey remains valid. We all have biases, but standards and ethics protect our work from those biases. Therefore, I’m not going to approach this topic as right versus left bias, or Republican versus Democrat bias. This article will focus on how the media have lost their credibility, why it matters, and how they can get it back.
Through both commission and omission, the media have repeatedly violated their code of ethics and sacrificed any credibility they once had.
The most galling aspect of this unprofessionalism has been outright deception. I’m not talking about honest mistakes. I’m talking about intentional peddling of untruths.
I could go on for pages. News organizations can no longer expect us to accept their reportage at face value, as they’ve been demonstrably and unapologetically dishonest far too many times.
The media has been guilty of “spinning” (twisting facts), to make news seem other than what is.
News organizations have presented “evidence” which turns out not to be as presented.
Due to demonstrated failure to adhere to any ethical or journalistic standards, the news media have forfeited their credibility. The American public must now watch the news with a jaundiced eye. Are we being given an honest story, or being fed a “narrative”? History would suggest that the most likely answer is “narrative.” Unfortunately, this has a real world, negative, impact on our society.
We need a professional and reliable news media as they are our primary window into our government. It is the media’s duty to provide checks and balances to our political system. As such, when the media has lost credibility, so has our political leadership. How can we assess a politician’s honesty, when the organization tasked with “keeping him honest” is not?
So, what are the implications of this to the general public? We no longer believe it when we’re told we need to sacrifice liberties to fight a pandemic – now or in the future. We don’t believe the earth will be damaged if we continue to emit carbon. We don’t believe the police are systemically racist. Joe Biden lacks the moral authority to govern us because we don’t know if he was duly elected. How can legislative and executive initiatives proceed with public support, when the public no longer trusts our leadership? Are you asking us to support a critical initiative, or merely feeding us a “narrative”? How are we to know which it is? When objective reporting morphs into propaganda, we distrust the information and the message. The damage to a functioning society is very real.
Can this sorry state of affairs be corrected? Yes, but only after news organizations realize their credibility is more important than the narrative.
Burn unreliable sources. If an anonymous source provides “evidence” that turns out to be untrue, expose them. The media does not owe anonymity to anyone who would provide false or misleading information. Disclose their identity and let them suffer the consequences. Failure to do so, exposes the media as supportive of the false information.
Retract falsehoods with the same voracity as originally presented. A front-page false story should be corrected with a front-page retraction. If an on-air guest presents false information during prime-time programming, the same guest should be required to issue a retraction during prime-time.
Terminate dishonest reporters. Just as in any other profession, people who are not proficient in their jobs must be terminated. Honesty is a foundational requirement for journalism. Bad apples will spoil the batch unless the bad apples are removed.
Condemn censorship. News organizations must welcome and embrace opposing views both within their own organizations and across the whole media waterfront. Supporting opposing views, and engaging in open debate is the best way to vet information. Organizations that support censorship are effectively admitting that their reportage cannot stand up to public scrutiny. Attempts to censor opposing views (by news or social media organizations) must be met by universal condemnation.
Content syndicated from TheBlueStateConservative.com with permission.
Before 2011, earmarks were a frequent source of corruption and furthering of personal agendas by…
The Biden administration is creating regulations at an historic pace and it's making everything so…
The U.S. economy is showing signs of stagflation as growth slumps down and prices continue…
Another week and another first for Donald J. Trump. No doubt, this is one he…
I was never a fan of Howard Stern or any “shock-jock,” for that matter, but…