Posted on 11/21/2008 10:17:50 AM PST by jazusamo
One of the most powerful media figures has blamed the newspapers downward plunge in circulation and profits on the fact that they have forfeited the trust and loyalty of their readers. But I think his basis for saying this is misplaced or incomplete.
According to Rupert Murdoch, who offered this diagnosis of newspaper troubles, the problem lies in the "complacency and condescension" in some newsrooms. He says, "The complacency stems from having enjoyed a monopoly - and now finding they have to compete for an audience they once took for granted. The condescension that many show their readers is an even bigger problem. It takes no special genius to point out that if you are contemptuous of your customers, you are going to have a hard time getting them to buy your product. Newspapers are no exception."
I'd say the problem runs far deeper than that. The problem is that the mainstream media has now become a lapdog and bootlicker of the Obama administration and during the campaign, and now during the transition, have demonstrated they are simply cheerleaders and propagandists for President-elect Barack Obama and have totally abandoned journalistic standards calling for fair and balanced reporting on Mr. Obama and on other national issues. In my view, the mainstream media pulled off a virtual coup by defrauding the voters into accepting an unqualified candidate who was never vetted properly.
The mainstream media continues to amaze even its most critical observers by going ever deeper into the journalistic sewer. I keep thinking the mainstream media can't get any worse, but it continues to prove I'm wrong.
Mr. Obama is now in the early stages of his transition period, and already the front-page of Newsweek portrays him as Lincoln, Time magazine shows him as FDR, The New York Times calls the young voters the "O-generation," and ABC is putting out a DVD called "Yes, We Can: the Barack Obama Story." Howard Kurtz, media writer of the Washington Post, described this all as a "giddy sense of boosterism." He should have added an unprofessional and biased slant on the news. Perhaps he might have also said the mainstream media have been drinking too much Obama Kool-Aid, leading to the Obamania Derangement Syndrome.
Charles Krauthammer, the great columnist, said after reading one Newsweek cover story on Mr. Obama, that it would not have any adjectives left over to describe the Second Coming. During the campaign and transition the mainstream media have done everything but officially declare Mr. Obama a Messiah, Savior and the Second Coming. They only imply that, and their coverage has come close to canonizing and deifying the Great One. There is no limit to the extent the mainstream media will now go to push their Chosen One, and if the present trend continues he will be declared a saint for his inaugural address.
Worse than all that is the mainstream media makes no pretense of being fair and balanced. As they wallow in their journalistic malpractice, they have no shame. Even literature prepared by the Obama campaign or the Obama administration would not be so over the edge in selling Mr. Obama, as they would fear readers might suspect that what is too good to be true probably is - a fraud. The mainstream media has abandoned all journalistic principles and shows no shame while they produce an endless flow of biased, dishonest and fraudulent journalism.
In my view, it's not the mainstream newspapers' complacency and condescension that caused the loss of trust and confidence; it's their fundamental dishonesty and failure to deliver the fair and balanced reporting and information the public wants. The public doesn't want to read Pravda or the writing, raving and ranting of a Joseph Goebbels-type that tells the big lie to make his points. That's where we are, and that's what is dooming the mainstream media.
I would say the public has moved even beyond a position of distrust toward the mainstream media. I for one see it as a force more dangerous to democracy than terrorism. We have been successful in fighting terrorism and keeping the homeland secure. But the mainstream media is not under control and in fact is getting worse by the day and consequently more damaging to democracy by the day. So there is not only distrust of the mainstream media but also positive and intense hatred for what it is and what it is doing.
The bottom line is that readers simply don't trust the mainstream media, and that's fatal to any media outlet. Mr. Murdoch got both sides of the trust issue right. First, he said the public has loss trust in the media. Second, he also mentions the other half of the trust issue, when he said the editors and reporters don't trust their readers. Mr. Murdoch wrote, "A recent American study reported that many editors and reporters simply do not trust their readers to make good decisions. Let's be clear about what this means. This is a polite way of saying that these editors and reporters think their readers are too stupid to think for themselves."
Mr. Murdoch does make one critically important point by explaining some of the impact of all the new technology and sources of news that we now have. Mr. Murdoch said, "It used to be that a handful of editors could decide what was news - and what was not. They acted as sort of demigods. If they ran a story, it became news. If they ignored an event, it never happened. Today, editors are losing this power. The Internet, for example, provides access to thousands of new sources that cover things an editor might ignore. And if you aren't satisfied with that, you can start up your own blog and cover and comment on the news yourself. Journalists like to think of themselves as watchdogs, but they haven't always responded well when the public calls them to account."
I know how arrogant and indifferent to criticism the mainstream media can be. I've been involved in several conferences with Philadelphia Inquirer editors about its anti-Israel bias, and afterward, I found I would have been better off talking to the wall, which might have been more receptive and I know would have had more sense. This was under the Knight-Ridder management teams, but from the new owner's product I see only marginal improvement. This means that the public can avoid the toxic journalism of the mainstream media simply by avoiding it, boycotting it and finding alternatives they can trust.
The mainstream media malpractice during and after the election represents the greatest malfeasance and media failure in history and if not counteracted has the potential to inflict grievous and even fatal damage to the greatest democracy in the history of the world.
If that's not bad enough, it gets worse. The public doesn't seem to care. Sen. McCain tried to make media malpractice into a campaign issue, but that had no traction. Here's the way Stephen Spruiell explained it, writing in the National Review (Dec. 1) in an article entitled "Going Mainstream: The Right Faces New Media Realities":
"The McCain campaign complained mightily about these and other instances of media malpractice, and the public shrugged. In perhaps the most blatant case of overt bias against McCain, New York Times executive editor Bill Keller said that each complaint from the McCain campaign made him want to 'find the toughest McCain story we've got and put it on the front page, just to show them they can't get away with it.'
"When the top newspaper editor in the country is openly discussing his strategy to attack the Republican nominee through the news pages and almost no one cares, complaining about bias just isn't going to accomplish much.
"The mainstream media have staked their future on Obama; that was evident in the way they conducted themselves during the campaign. Economic and political forces are driving notionally objective news organizations toward overt partisanship. Now is the time to invest in conservative alternatives and work to secure mainstream reception for conservative voices. The media game has changed and have to get better at playing it."
As long as so many people rely on the mainstream media for their news and information, Republicans and conservatives are going to operate under a serious handicap. So there are some remedies.
First, the Republicans have to do more to directly communicate news and information to supporters, potential supporters and everyone else. This is much more practicable with the advent of the Internet, e-mail, blogs and all the rest. In an interesting article, Patrick Ruffini of the National Review (Dec. 1), in an article titled "Roots of Defeat: Let Us Study And Emulate The Left's Online Tactics," there is an explanation of how the Democrats used the Internet, how they have done a better job of using the new technology, and how the Republicans have to catch up and surpass them in the use of the Internet and the new technology.
The Republicans don't do a good job of getting the word out. I don't think I received one good document or e-mail from the Republican National Committee setting forth material designed to help sell their view and refute their opponent's arguments.
Second, the pubic has to be mobilized to effectively criticize mainstream media bias by all means available, such as letters-to-the-editor, calls to talk shows and support of groups that fight media bias.
Third, the public has to start inflicting economic damage on the dishonest, fraudulent, and biased mainstream media. That means individual and organized boycotts of the mainstream media, canceling subscriptions and discontinuing advertising in them.
Fourth, the public has to start going to alternative media outlets that can be trusted to give the whole picture. There are hundreds of such sites and here are some good places to start:
* Newspapers: The Wall Street Journal, Investor's Business Daily, The Washington Times, The New York Post, and The Philadelphia Bulletin. One of the best conservative papers, The New York Sun, recently folded. So if you want these alternative voices to survive, you better support them.
* Magazines: The National Review, The Weekly Standard, and Commentary.
* Broadcasters: Fox News Network and WNTP-AM (990) both around the clock. The 990 lineup includes Bill Bennett, Dennis Prager, Michael Medved, Hugh Hewitt, Michael Savage, Mark Levine, and Mike Gallagher, many of which have excellent Web sites of their own. Also Glen Beck, Sean Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh on WPHT-AM (1210).
* Web sites: Townhall.com, Frontpage.com, and Drudgereport.com.
* Web sites specializing in media bias: camera.org and honestreporting.com.
* Blogs: Pajamasmedia.com, instapundit.com, and littlegreenfootballs.com.
Fifth, support the Republican Party and other voices of opposition that provide the kind of information that the mainstream media ignores. You have to put your money where your mouth is to assure that the public gets both sides of the ongoing political controversies.
Herb Denenberg is a former Pennsylvania Insurance Commissioner, Pennsylvania Public Utility Commissioner, and professor at the Wharton School. He is a longtime Philadelphia journalist and consumer advocate. He is also a member of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of the Sciences. His column appears daily in The Bulletin. You can reach him at advocate@ thebulletin.us.
The MSM needs to portray 0bama as a second Jimmuh Cahtuh or Herbert Hoover in the interests of fair and balanced journalism.
I would say the public has moved even beyond a position of distrust toward the mainstream media. I for one see it as a force more dangerous to democracy than terrorism. We have been successful in fighting terrorism and keeping the homeland secure. But the mainstream media is not under control and in fact is getting worse by the day and consequently more damaging to democracy by the day. So there is not only distrust of the mainstream media but also positive and intense hatred for what it is and what it is doing.
BINGO!! (I am still only half way through reading but had to pull this out and comment.)
America’s Fourth Estate is the Fifth Column
You’re definitely correct.
So there is not only distrust of the mainstream media but also positive and intense hatred for what it is and what it is doing.
So on spot! I look forward to the day when the liberal MSM is just a vague memory. If all were reduced to rubble I would be dancing in the streets. Yes the public hates the MSM!
“I would say the public has moved even beyond a position of distrust toward the mainstream media. I for one see it as a force more dangerous to democracy than terrorism. We have been successful in fighting terrorism and keeping the homeland secure. But the mainstream media is not under control and in fact is getting worse by the day and consequently more damaging to democracy by the day. So there is not only distrust of the mainstream media but also positive and intense hatred for what it is and what it is doing.”
Amen brother! 100% correct.
He's right on the mark with that.
Fifth, support the Republican Party and other voices of opposition that provide the kind of information that the mainstream media ignores. You have to put your money where your mouth is to assure that the public gets both sides of the ongoing political controversies.
This contradicts ever so slightly a comment above that says the Republican National Committee didn't send out any literature that clearly articulated much of anything (my words and summary of this point made). Thus I must say that the Republican party put up someone like John McCain as a presidential candidate. Most of us conservatives are still shaking our heads at how this guy won our primary. I have never seen a Republican treat Republicans with such distain and be so very nice and pandering to the Left as McCain is. He is enemy number two. Think McCain Feingold and all the phone numbers these lefties in California have to go harrass supporters of Prop 8. Thank McCain Feingold for that. Those numbers should not be available. But I digress.
Until the Republican Party actually has conservative ideals and puts up candidates that support and commit to following through with those ideals AND can clearly fight for those ideals (against the left when confronted) as well as clearly sell those ideals to the American people as any smart large organization that wants to exist has to do these days.
They are considered the enemy from within. Look at what happened with the spending and all the old guys that are near death that are put up as candidates. It is time to modernize the GOP and go back to its conservative roots--define them--and sell them through the best PR around and also candidates that act as such. Until then. Until I see movement in this direction I will NOT consider the a solution. They are gutless right now and shameful.
>>So there is not only distrust of the mainstream media but also positive and intense hatred for what it is and what it is doing.
>
>He’s right on the mark with that.
There’s also an intense hatred and distrust of our politicians, all of them, in congress and state... and if anybody ISN’T sickened by the “Recount until the loser wins” (Minnesota, NM last election cycle) they ought to be; in a corrupt election, nobody’s vote counts.
Also, at what point is the military-man to put his foot down and say, “F-ck You!” to these fools who are destroying the Constitution that he’s sworn to protect? If a lower-enlisted, or even most NCOs and junior officers, said it it would be considered improper and insubordinate; and yet, the officers that ARE in the positions of authority to say it, are too embroiled in politics to do anything!
Yes. Such a refreshing article. I am also glad he took many points that Murdock made and elaborated and dissected then even further. I had many of these thoughts as I read what Murdock has said--but just didn't know it until this gentleman articulated then so nicely :-). I also love that the author is solution focused and with such solid but simple directives. Refreshing indeed. Motivates me to support these orgs and the media he lists. Although he missed one--Free Republic :-D.
I often wonder if the authors of these article surf the web to read comments regarding their articles on the blogs. As a writer I am sure many of them do, if not at work, in the hours that follow at home tucked in bed with their jammies--LOL--where they most likely wrote some of these--if not where they first jotted these thoughts down.
If this is the case for this fellow (not the jammies, but the checking of comments I say--Awesome job my friend. Way to push the envelope on already poignant news (Murdock and his incisive analysis of the MSM) and to propose clearly defined solutions to your readers that actually will make a change.
Good post and I especially agree with the above.
I disagree. If there were such a vast distrust of the MSM then the majority of the country would stop watching the network news. But that’s not the case. The majority of Americans get their news from ABC, CBS and NBC. This is spoon feeding blatant socialist propaganda to the masses especially younger generation. If there are no oversight or consequences to them for what they spew, plan on just getting ready for the collapse in complete free fall right now.
Fifth, support the Republican Party and other voices of opposition that provide the kind of information that the mainstream media ignores. You have to put your money where your mouth is to assure that the public gets both sides of the ongoing political controversies.
Do not support the Republican Party because it provides the kind of information that the MSM ignores. Support the party only if its values and beliefs are in line with yours. The party does need to gets its message out, but it first needs to determine what its message is. I do not fault entirely the MSM for the current state of the Republicans.
Not so -- their news shows only average around 20-22 million viewers combined. More than that may watch some nights since not everyone watches every time, but that is far far short of a "majority of Americans".......
If you add in all MSM sources such as newspapers etc. it's a lot more but the alphabet networks do not control the agenda the way they once did. Still, they do enjoy far more influence than they should.... same can be said for the "agenda-setting" NY Times and WaPo, of course.
See post 16. I should have read your comment before I spent time articulating what you just said!
This coming four years will be a test of the dedication of our fine military, hopefully they will endure and overcome.
Many of us are on the same wavelength. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.