No one disputes the fact that the “media” is biased. Alan Loudell makes the observation that is reporters and editors who are middle and upper-middle class bring a class bias to the stories they do. If they are good journalists they might be a bit more aware of that bias, but it is still there.
Loudell contends that most of the journalists that he knows have a biased interest in presenting “good” stories. I take it he means objective, accurate and meaningful to their audience. Here we part ways.
I don’t see that journalists are particularly interested in objectivity and I sure as hell don’t see an American media that is interested in accuracy. Maybe on a person-by-person basis it is possible to find an occasional journalist that puts a premium on accuracy, but by and large journalists accuracy is a quant and bygone notion. (See George Bush & the invasion of Iraq)
Most media observers assert that accuracy and objectivity has been swept away by the confluence of two social changes. One is the change in television journalism from a public service to a moneymaking entertainment ventures for the parent corporation. It is laughable to think that Katie Courric and Stone Phillips consider “objectivity and accuracy” part of their mission. Likewise, as newspaper readership continues to dwindle the “4th estate” newsroom depicted in the novel “All the President’s Men” is as relevant to current newspaper operations as a lascaux cave painting.
Downers like Walter Cronkite and Edward R. Murrow would not have a home in the modern television news operations and Woodward and Bernstein have been replaced by court stenographers like Ron Williams, Celia Cohen and Patrick Jackson who put bread on the table by comforting the comfortable.
The other major societal change that has overthrown objectivity and accuracy is the radicalization of the conservative movement around the “liberal media” bogeyman. It is clear that banging the “liberal media” drum for twenty years has paid off in spades for the conservative movement. Terrified of being thought of as “liberal” – newspapers and television have adopted an absurdist stance that devalues the notion of objective truth and elevates “balance” to a high virtue. So high that even the most preposterous conservative theories and claims such as “human activity is not responsible for climate change” and “George Bush is qualified to be the President of the United States” get “equal” treatment alongside of actual facts. The press has been so cowed by the right wing that the fear of being considered a liberal was the subtext of every story leading up to the illegal invasion of Iraq.
As far as Loudell and his approach to the debasement of journalism is concerned, maybe I’ve been a bit hard on him. But I don’t think so. His responses to the couple of posts that have been here indicate that he is about aware of the fact that the system is corrupt as a fish is aware that he is wet. He is a standup guy to continue to defend himself here, but a better defense would be to avoid the bogus neutrality of modern journalism. For example, I remember quite clearly on Election Day it was becoming clear that a Democratic wave was building. While (to his credit) reporting the actual facts of the day, Loudell went out of his way to make sure he interviewed an equal number of clueless loser who were willing to claim that there was no Democratic wave building. What was the point, other than to inoculate himself against the charge of being part of the “liberal media”? It was disgusting.
So I don’t think it is unfair to beat up Loudell here when he absent mindedly interviews Republican spinmiesters and lets their naked shilling for failed conservatism go unchallenged, however I do have qualms about beating up such a nice guy.
Loudell, for all of the faults of modern journalism that he embodies, has ten times more character than the all of the frauds and losers who pose as journalists here in Delaware. At least he takes a stab at defending his indefensible industry. When was the last time you heard Celia Cohen or Doug Williams defend the integrity of their chosen profession?