It also touches on a few things I've been thinking of, in terms of why there's so much distrust for MSM... As well as the feeling that journalists are not living up to their role as the fourth estate.
There's a lot to discuss there, and some things I don't really have insight into (this article helps validate some of those thoughts. Particularly the issues with access journalism, and the willingness to overlook negative stories in order to maintain the relationships that give you access for others. It's a thorny problem that I don't have a good answer for. Other than that journalists, like all of us, have to use their best judgment. Hopefully guided by the question about what best serves the public interest.)
What did not get addressed here, and I'm less sure about, is somewhat related -
I recall reading the biography about a journalist some time ago (I think it was Robert Novak? It's been a while). Anyways, one of the things I remember most was when he discussed his salary... Because while he didn't consider himself all that wealthy (and I'm sure in comparison to the many political leaders he covered he wasn't), he was nowhere near the average, and was probably in the 1%.
I'm sure most of the smaller media organizations don't pay as well (local news, plus some of the smaller national news agencies), but I also suspect that quite a few of the big names get paid similar.
Why does this matter?
Because there's a sense that they aren't acting as the eyes and ears of the general public, but rather are part of the establishment.
Its more complicated than that, I think. Which is part of the reason I haven't sat down to actually write something earlier.
I mean... The powers-that-be have a long history of using the media, so it's hard to say whether this is truly different. Maybe our expectations were never actually met.
Plus there's the issue that they are businesses. They have to make a profit, something many of them are struggling to do right now. Is it reasonable to expect them to spend money and resources doing in depth reporting on policy issues that most Americans will never read? (I mean, I probably would. But I'm definitely not the norm here.)
I guess what I'm trying to say is that the MSM doesn't seem to represent the general public. Idk if that's because of the people who own the newspapers and news channels, if it's because top reporters are likely to be the 1%, if it's access journalism and the tendency to relate to the people you're constantly around, or what.
My poli sci classes talked about regulatory capture. That is in order to understand how to best regulate an industry the regulators generally have to work with and elicit the expertise of the businesses they regulate.
The danger is that these agencies start serving the interests of those businesses, rather than the general public for which they were established.
It feels kind of like the same thing has happened to MSM. And that noone - nobody - not the Republicans, nor Democrats. Definitely not the CEOs or Wall Street brokers, and not even the journalists are looking out for or care about the general public.
No comments:
Post a Comment