Good journalism, somebody once said, is a nation talking to
itself.
That's "talking to itself," not yelling,
screaming, shrieking, talking over one another and generally engaging in verbal
bullying.
Yet that is just about all we see on prime-time
television--especially cable television--these days.
Prime time cable TV
outlets such as Fox, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, etc. continue to produce a proliferation of hosts and
pundits with no foundation in journalistic ethics and tradition.
Today's
so-called "news shows" more often than not devolve into shout fests
where guests and hosts engage, not in any kind of intelligent discussion of
issues, but in contests to see who can talk the loudest or bully those who
disagree with them into submission.
That kind of behavior comes with a steep
price. What does the viewing public learn from such exhibitions of bad
behavior?
The
answer, I would argue, is not much. Because when people are yelling at one
another, calling one another names or generally behaving like petulant
children, reasoned discourse disappears and the viewer gets lost in the shrill entertainment
of the moment.
Opinion
is NOT reporting. Yet those who monitor the recent explosion of misnamed
"news shows" say viewers don't really discern between shows with
obvious political agendas and those that attempt to present events with a
minimum of subjectivity and a maximum of fairness and balance.
When I started out in the newspaper business, reporters were
taught that while all of us have biases, as professionals we must work to subordinate
those biases and keep our opinions out of the stories we report.
It was something that was drilled into our heads and good
editors and producers made sure it never left.
That is simply not the case today. Too many journalists (or
those who like to call themselves journalists) feel compelled to insert their
opinions in everything they write or produce.
In fact, many of these "journalists" are not journalists
at all, but simply former political operatives and talking heads who wrap
themselves in the mantle of journalism when real journalists are risking their
lives in places like Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq to bring people reliable news.
These shows, with their pseudo-journalist hosts and churlish,
dogmatic guests debase the media and undermine their integrity and credibility.
The
opinion-fueled shows that dominate cable news channels during prime time are far
removed from the old-school straight news programs such as the traditional
nightly network newscasts that many of us grew up with.
At
an awards dinner a few years ago for the late Mike Wallace of CBS 60-Minutes
fame, I had an opportunity to talk with Walter Cronkite about the state of
television news in general and prime time cable news in particular. During his
reign on CBS Cronkite, who died in 2009, was often referred to as the most
trusted journalist in America--an appellation he didn't take lightly.
During
our conversation he decried the lack of ethics and professionalism that is so
pervasive today.
"Too
many of these people simply don't care about or have any desire to ferret out
the truth," Cronkite told me. "Too many have intense political or
social agendas and rather than present information as objectively as possible, they
want to jam their opinions down our throats."
And,
he added, most of the public cannot distinguish between these faux journalists
and real reporters.
The
Society of Professional Journalists--an organization I have belonged to since
my days as a student at the University of Kansas--has a code of ethics that most
of cable TV's shouting heads have no concept of.
I,
as well as a majority of the journalists I have worked with in the U.S. and around
the world, always worked assiduously to follow that code which consists of
several sections.
The
ones that stand out most in these days of ersatz journalism (and which are,
unfortunately, too often ignored) are:
·
Give
voice to the voiceless; official and unofficial sources of information can be
equally valid.
·
Distinguish
between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled
and not misrepresent fact or context.
·
Test
the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid
inadvertent error. Deliberate distortion is never permissible.
·
Journalists
should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public's right to
know.
·
Support
the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.
·
Journalists
are accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other.
I
have purposely NOT mentioned any names of the most egregious offenders here, because that would require several
more pages of copy. But I urge you to watch these so-called "news
shows" with a critical eye and ear from now on.
Pay
attention to who they have on as guests or as experts--and how often they
appear. Watch how those with opposing views are interviewed--or not
interviewed. Are they allowed to get their points or arguments across without
being shouted down?
What
kinds of discussions are held on issues? Are they truth-seeking or simply
attempts to reinforce the opinion of the host?
Does
each member of a panel have an opportunity to talk without being insulted by
the host or by some other panel member?
How
you answer these questions will go a long way in helping you to determine if
you are watching a frenzied opinion-fest or a real news show designed to get at the
truth.
As Thomas Jefferson once said: "An informed citizenry
is the only true repository of the public will."
So,
I will end where I began.
Good
journalism is a nation talking to itself--and, I would add, it is a nation that
learns from intelligent, rational discourse and has at its core the
responsibility to help advance and encourage an informed citizenry.
No comments:
Post a Comment