Bizarroland: David Frum Says "Mistakes...Are Why People Should Trust Media"

David Frum, former President George W. Bush speechwriter, appeared on CNN's Reliable Sources with Brian Stelter today to discuss media in the age of Trump.

The current Atlantic senior editor started off his monologue by making the following claim.

On the surface, this sounds accurate. Astronomers and scientists follow the scientific method in order to discover the truth. As a reminder, that simple six step process is as follows: 1. Make an observation, 2. Ask a question, 3. Form a hypothesis, or testable explanation, 4. Make a prediction based on the hypothesis, 5. Test the prediction, 6. Iterate: use the results to make new hypotheses or a prediction. Scientists largely do not report their findings to the public as they are in "the process of discovering truth," only once their experimentation is completed and is peer reviewed.

If the media actually did that before they released their reporting, more likely than not less mistakes would be published.

Yet, Frum excuses the media's rush to produce false statements without fully testing their hypothesis because he says they are only working off partial pieces of truth.

This contradicts his first comparison saying that like astronomers, the public should trust the media because they make mistakes. Yes, it is good for the public when scientists admit their failures just as when the media corrects a story. But the admission of error is not the reason for public trust. Scientists are reliable because they have a system in place that gives confidence they will not make a similar mistake in the future.

Plus, if a mistake happens, the scientific method allows the experts to retrace their steps and see where the error occurred. It is unclear what system is in place, aside from the public putting pressure on news organizations, that exists in the media to hold journalists accountable for fake news and to prevent future mistakes.

Frum continued saying that Trump and his supporters simply tell too many lies for the media to keep up with.

At this point, Brian Stelter clearly confused asked Frum for some clarification.

In Frum's attempt to defend his fellow media members, he largely discredits their work by saying the media reports as they go along. It would be far better if the media acted as law enforcement did; gathering all the facts, interviewing witnesses, and looking at evidence before presenting their conclusion under strict scrutiny.

Frum's bizarre explanation as to why the American public should still trust the mainstream media is half-baked at best. According to Frum, the impetus for determining the truth falls largely on the reader. As a consumer of news they should read multiple sources rather than depend on one source for their information.

This is true, all purveyors of the news should hear all sides regarding an issue to ensure that they have a full version of the story. They should then make up their own opinion based on the facts. But, the audience also has a very reasonable expectation that news organizations use a strict method with standards before they publish their findings.

The "process of bringing truth to light"??? Huh??

The mainstream press, as they are called, along with Progressive politicians, may have passed the point described by Thomas Jefferson in the following words:

"Nothing is so mistaken as the supposition, that a person is to extricate himself from a difficulty, by intrigue, by chicanery, by dissimulation, by trimming, by an untruth, by an injustice. This increases the difficulties ten fold; and those who pursue these methods, get themselves so involved at length, that they can turn no way but their infamy becomes more exposed. It is of great importance to set a resolution, not to be shaken, never to tell an untruth. There is no vice so mean, so pitiful, so contemptible; and he who permits himself to tell a lie once, finds it much easier to do it a second and third time, till at length it becomes habitual; he tells lies without attending to it, and truths without the world’s believing him. This falsehood of the tongue leads to that of the heart, and in time depraves all its good dispositions." - See "Letter to Peter Carr, August 19, 1785," in Thomas Jefferson: Writings (New York: The Library of America, 1984), pp. 814-815.
". . . he tells lies without attending to it, and truths without the world's believing him." - Jefferson

Thomas Jefferson's views on the importance of a free press are well known. Nevertheless, Jefferson was well aware of the dark under belly of a segment of the press which might set itself up, as he called it, "to serve the ministers" of a "despotic government."

Note that in the last of the following quotations on the subject, Jefferson noted, "But the fact being once established, that the press is impotent when it abandons itself to falsehood," he declared, "I leave to others to restore it to its strength by recalling it within the pale of truth."

"[A despotic] government always [keeps] a kind of standing army of newswriters who, without any regard to truth or to what should be like truth, [invent] and put into the papers whatever might serve the ministers. This suffices with the mass of the people who have no means of distinguishing the false from the true paragraphs of a newspaper." --Thomas Jefferson to G. K. van Hogendorp, Oct. 13, 1785. (*) ME 5:181, Papers 8:632
Does this sound like the previous Administration/Clinton Machine method?
"[I have seen] repeated instances of the publication of what has not been intended for the public eye, and the malignity with which political enemies torture every sentence from me into meanings imagined by their own wickedness only... Not fearing these political bull-dogs, I yet avoid putting myself in the way of being baited by them, and do not wish to volunteer away that portion of tranquillity, which a firm execution of my duties will permit me to enjoy." --Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, 1807. ME 11:226
"Conscious that there was not a truth on earth which I feared should be known, I have lent myself willingly as the subject of a great experiment, which was to prove that an administration, conducting itself with integrity and common understanding, cannot be battered down even by the falsehoods of a licentious press, and consequently still less by the press as restrained within the legal and wholesome limits of truth. This experiment was wanting for the world to demonstrate the falsehood of the pretext that freedom of the press is incompatible with orderly government. I have never, therefore, even contradicted the thousands of calumnies so industriously propagated against myself. But the fact being once established, that the press is impotent when it abandons itself to falsehood, I leave to others to restore it to its strength by recalling it within the pale of truth. Within that, it is a noble institution, equally the friend of science and of civil liberty." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Seymour, 1807. ME 11:155

One of the amendments to the Constitution [* * *] expressly declares, that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press"; thereby guarding in the same sentence, and under the same words, the freedom of religion, of speech and of the press; insomuch, that whatever violates either, throws down the sanctuary which covers the others. - Thomas Jefferson, TITLE: Kentucky Resolutions. EDITION: Washington ed. ix, 466. EDITION: Ford ed., vii, 295. PLACE: [none given] DATE: 1798

Unless and until the media does away with ‘personalities, media celebrities, and bylines, they cannot be trusted’. The only people who should be trusted to be in the media are those who do it because they want to uncover the truth - not because the want their names in lights. The solution is rather simple. Bylines should be known only by the news organization, for purposes of rewarding good journalism. Television news should feature a different newsreader’ from the community each night - with commentary or media celebrities. The people who are granted White House and Congressional access should, in order to remove conflict of interest, only be the people who collect information. They should not be the visible people on air or in print. In short, make journalism about journalism, with its rewards including knowing internally that you are being truthful, doing your job, and thus are a very important and credible professional (accompanied by appropriate financial compensation by the media employers). We don’t need media celebrities. They dilute the professionalism by leaps and bounds.

What about lies, Dave? Those aren't "mistakes" except insofar as it's a mistake to tell one you get caught on. They're lies. And the media tell them all the time. Stating that candidate A sacrifices puppies to Satan in order to harm the candidacy and saying later after the damage is done, "Oh, I made a mistake" is actually two lies, isn't it?

"False but accurate" is a lie. "Russian collusion" is a lie. "Bragged about molesting women" is a lie. Empty Trump rallies are lies. Benghazi was a lie. "Most qualified candidate in the history of American politics" was an outrageous lie. The Steele dossier is a packet full of lies, constructed by liars, paid for by liars, misrepresented as actual intelligence by at least one liar, used for illegal surveillance by other liars, and covered for desperately by a coterie of high officials who are liars, reported solemnly by media celebrities who are liars and dupes so stupid they wouldn't know the truth if it bit them on the ass, or care. Need I go on?

Ya—right. We can’t believe media, just like we shouldn’t believe “science” today.

As if “scientists” don’t burn the “research” that disagrees with their hypothesis!!!!! Scientistsr can even get a degree anymore with the classical worldview which created Modern Science. True science hardly exists anymore. They fudge on their “findings” and their “research” and misreport it and get “peer review” adulation for their falsified work—or get destroyed like Wakefield, when they report the straight forward science of their research. (I wrote a research paper on Wakefield). Truth is banned in science-—for at least since the 50s. Unless they are developing bio-weapons to unleash on the masses which should be unconstitutional but corporations are doing it anyhow.

I’ve read it all, read about the whistleblowers who disappeared or get destroyed and lose their jobs or tenure because they dare expose the lies and the true agenda of the corporations and government, like Thompson at the CDC for revealing the evidence that proved Autism was caused by vaccines—all the ones who keep their jobs are crony capitalists who sold their souls to Lucifer and the corporations. The ones who are for truth, get vilified and marginalized or are driven from their positions and then ignored by congress when they report the truth.

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.