"News judgment," Oh where have you been?
Digby linked to this excellent piece by Edward Wasserman in the Miami Herald the other day and I just got around to reading it. He basically solves the news problem that we face.
You know, like how bogus claims are repeated endlessly throughout the media (like the health bill contains "death panels") and even though they are debunked---the damage is already done.
So this time, when it came to the "death panels," The Washington Post's influential media reporter, Howard Kurtz, observed: "For once, mainstream journalists did not retreat to the studied neutrality of quoting dueling antagonists." Reporters took the additional step of pointing out, on their own authority, that the proposals don't contain any such provision. To "he said, she said," was added: "we say."
Trouble is, it hasn't really mattered. Even though news organizations debunked the claim, 45 percent of respondents to an NBC poll still believe the reforms would indeed allow the federal government to halt treatment to the elderly -- a staggering number.
Why? Maybe because, by Kurtz's count, Palin's "death panels" were mentioned 18 times by his own paper, 16 times in The New York Times and at least 154 times on cable and network news (not including daytime news shows.)
Plainly, refuting a falsehood doesn't keep it from doing harm. The solution isn't some cheap fix, first giving end-of-the-world play to some incendiary fantasy and then inserting a line that says the preceding was utter rubbish. The real problem goes to the core of traditional news practices. As Greg Marx noted in a sensible Columbia Journalism Review posting, the solution is "making a more concerted effort not to disseminate false or dubious claims in the first place."
Isn't that simple? All the media has to do is fact check a story first and present the truth instead of repeating lies over and over again in the interest of "balance". Then we won't have to worry about an ill-informed public not getting the information they need on important issues. Issues that actually have an impact on their lives, like health care. Unfortunately, that appears too much to ask:
As the saying goes, what really matters isn't what people think, it's what they think about: Debunking falsehoods is fine, but the more that news media embrace it as if it's a cure-all, the worse we'll all be. The solution isn't to refute, it's to ignore. End the practice of rewarding the most sensational, the most irresponsible, the most baseless allegations with top-of-the-news billing. The media bury worthwhile news all the time; how about burying the worthless stuff?
There, however, the problem isn't so much with reporters, it's with their bosses, the ones who insist on running the screaming footage from "town meetings," on giving dramatic lies a prominence they don't deserve -- ensuring an audience, but also ensuring the lies a public life no reasoned refutation can end.
"He said, she said" has always been a dubious way to report the world. "We say" helps, but only a little. The real solution is simple: It's called news judgment.
Don't you love that? "News Judgment." What a miraculous concept. I wonder how we could actually make that happen?
Thank Edward for this rare bit of sanity from the media: edward_wasserman@hotmail.com
to charge media outlets who knowingly or negligently publish false information with defrauding the public.
And who might I ask would charge them, and then enforce the law???, since all the agencies have been gutted by the BUSHCRIMEFAMILY.
How about the Dept. O' Homeland Security?
};)>
Charge those who start these lies with a crime and throw them in jail....if only...
This is one of the most insidious things the right has done. They get away with lying, and even when they "apologize" over a poorly worded health care survey; even when the news media debunks "death panels"; as John has said, the "damage has already been done." This really upsets me. There ought to be a law against it.
I've said it several times before: there is a place in hell for those who start and spread these lies.
As "News judgment."
Maybe it could persist in print, as long as print journalism can persist.
But the Cabloids gotta fill that time. They'll fill it with whatever attracts the eyes. the only thing that matters is "truthiness," as Colbert called it...
Nothing could better suit the practice of the most effective propaganda device in history, the Big Lie, than the 24-hour news cycle.
News organization have taken over the job of the tabloids. Whether it's some teen star doing something or a giant chicken on Mars, they run with just about every story no matter how stupid it makes them look.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
By the way, Beck has recently started saying that he will only be presenting "facts."
I wonder if that jackass will correct the record, refute the lies, and tell the truth?
Nope.....over the weekend, I saw a video of him comparing Obama to Hitler once more. He and a guest were actually comparing Obama to Saddam Hussein.
Yep, there is a place in hell for Beck.
...and there is no "next life," no "hell" in which the miscreants can suffer for their crimes. If he's gonna suffer, it's gotta be in the "here-and-now."
Suggestions?
I personally don't believe in heaven and hell, but I'm sure Beck does. He's a devout Mormon, and while I know very little about what they believe in, they probably believe in an afterlife.
I say bring back the stockades. String Beck up naked a month at a time for the rest of his life. Let people walk by to throw tomatoes and whatever else they want to throw at him.
Make him have homosexual sex.
Make this country turn Communist and have a never-ending string of black Presidents. That will drive him crazy.
He has no moral standards at all. Mormons, generally, try to be moral. They try to do what they believe is the right thing. Beck? Never. Don't forget--he's a "performance artist." And, he's already crazy. No, wait. I'm wrong. I confused "crazy" with "pathetic." Sorry.
As I said before it does not matter how rediculous their claims are the people who want to believe this kind of stuff will believe it.
The other thing is that the people who actually watch Cluster Faux for their opinion and news really think Fox is telling the truth. I have talked to a few idiots who think Fox is "The News." No matter how I try to explain to them that they are being used and punked they don't want to hear it. If I try to tell them how stupid the whole concept of "death panels" are they don't want to hear it because the want to believe.
Unfortunately I don't think there is an easy answer to how to fix it. We always hope something like Fox would be responsible enough to tell the truth and argue or debate the subjects on the facts. Of course Fox has shown that they have no morals and are doing anything for a $$$$. I just hope that these people are only the small minority that they should be.
to which you allude is having a major impact on this nation and indeed the whole planet! How do we turn this around? What do you think of my suggestion herein below?
BTW, I just spoke with a 'Republican' friend two days ago about 'health care reform' and he couldn't even identify the source of his talking points, especially his rather flippant assertion that Obama is 'dragging our country down into pure socialism.' When I pressed him for sources and for what he means by that assertion (including, what is socialism?), he began mumbling and apologetically admitted he's "not much of a debater."
I find that this is a common response from my 'right wing' family and friends. They can spout the most common talking points, but they cannot back them up with facts, nor can they knowledgeably debate these issues.
I have found this too be true as well. I recently had a student tell me Obama was a commie - socialist, I asked if he had ever even read Karl Marx (insert blank expression here). They can spew the talking points flawlessly - but they truly have no clue what they mean - like trained circus monkeys...
(and not the good kind that ride unicycles and smoke cigars)
(and not the good kind that ride unicycles and smoke cigars)
Limbaugh can ride a unicycle?
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
HA! Sorry to pull a ysbadden but maybe something like this?
http://www.unicycle.uk.com/shop/shopdisplaypr...
His own demons may do him in mentally. The guy seems like every day he could easily go right over the edge. Like I said before, I don't know if he believes what he says or if he is just cruel and enjoys whipping people into a frenzy to see what they will do next.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
Beck is without a doubt mentally unstable. I think he knows exactly what he is doing, but at the same time, he's just crazy enough to do it. I'm sure he takes perverse pleasure in the fact that he is whipping people up into a frenzy, and I'm sure he secretly wishes for someone to hurt Obama.
He's a psychopath.
Beck wants to say, I told you so. He is casting a wide net accusing obama et al of all sorts of things. If he can make anyone of those things stick, he'll be elated. So far he's coming up empty.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
He may be "empty," but he's got 3 million viewers, which I find most disgusting and sickening. Faux News will continue to let him get away with his crap because of the ratings.
We can only hope that he does lose it and goes off the deep end one of these days.
I do watch some of his show just to see which blind alley he will go down next. Between losing sponsor money and getting all wired up, there is no doubt in my mind that he could easily slip over the edge. He is already playing the victim and saying that you dont have to like him but he begs you to listen to the warnings he is giving about the country's future. If this guy were standing on a street corner preaching this shit, everyone would readily admit that he was nuts.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
Patricia,
You're an awfully brave woman watching this guy! I have turned his show on on rare occasions, and I have seen a few videos, but I just cannot stand watching more than a minute or two at a time. He really makes me sick.
I do see that he had a psychiatrist on his Friday show, Dr. Keith Bozo Ablow, to help him strengthen himself against name callers. Maybe this is the first sign of his breaking?
O'Reilly is about the only person I can watch on Faux....and that's pretty tough as well.
Let me know if and when you think Beck will finally lose it....then I'll tune in!
This morning he was a guest on fox and friends and he was there to make five points. When he began to make his five points he blanked out and they had to show them on the screen for him to remember what they were and he still, even reading them, lost his train of thought and just sort of winged it. It's just a matter of time.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
Probably his meds.
I know somebody close to me who is mentally ill, and the meds do cause him to blank out often.
Faux just needs to take him off the air (for good) for his own sake, if not for the sake of the country.
I too am amazed that Patricia can stomach this mentally ill slime ball. I too have tried to watch and only managed a minute or two (same with Hannity). In a just world Beck would not be on the air for obvious reasons. Either would O'Reilly and the rest of the circus on Fox.
on the playground in elementary school. Revenge can be a very strong motivating factor. Let's face it--he's just a nasty fucker who caught the attention of someone who could make money off of his character disorder. Thus his success.
These are the people we used to see in the sideshows at the circus. Like the calf with two heads or the bearded lady. Someone saw them somewhere and knew he could use these pitiful creatures to make money.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
and, I would wager that's why at least a portion of his viewers tune in. Not that it explains the rest of the fearful, resentful, and hate mongering crowd...
Rational thinking and common sense come in somewhere. Or at least they used to. When I first read Palin's Tweet about death panels I just laughed at the absurdity of it. Then first thing you know it is being discussed seriously everywhere, even now we hear mentions of it in serious tones.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
But we've fallen so far as to not only fail in critical thinking, we get angry when people point out the obvious.
I've lost track of the relatives and friends who forward dippy internet hoaxes and then get all offended when I point out it's a hoax, or complain because a friend back along the chain of forwards got offended for the same reason, and is now not talking to them.
I'm convinced this is part of the overall decline of society, which I'm currently identifying as three stages:
1. The inability to apply critical thinking.
2. The inability to observe the world around us.
3. The inability to think at all.
We're at #3, IMHO. Stupid for the win!
but Stupid has already won.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
Smart cannot fight stupid.
Stupid has to want to not be stupid, and that's not happening.
Exactly!
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
the worst stage of all:
4. stubborn resistance to any and all challenges to one's now vaunted inability to think at all.
No, we can't have that nasty cognitive dissonance destroying our perfect world view, now can we?
Shadowgm, last week I sent an e-mail to all of the names (a few bounced back) on the latest right-wing e-mail about what is in the health care bill. This thing even cited page and paragraph numbers (which of course were not actual page numbers and the paragraphs non-existent). It was so off the wall that I could not believe that those who had forwarded it really forwarded it. Many of these people are college grauduates with professional careers. Many consider themselves to be very religious.
Many of those who were forwarding the latest e-mail are people I have known for 25 - 30 years; friends, some even close. In my e-mail I said that what was in the latest e-mail was not true, that it was so far off the wall that no thinking person could believe it and that I would expect that they could figure it out or at least do some research before passing this foolishness on.
I haven't heard from any of those who received my e-mail, not even those who are the main ones behind forwarding this garbage.
I actually had a patient's family member tell me that Obama was going to give everyone on welfare a car. Before I could check myself, because the hospital in which I work is very concerned with customer service, I blurted out that what he had said was the stupidest thing I had ever heard. I also asked him if he thought that the citizens of the U.S. would actually allow that to happen without rioting? He, of course, was someone who was living marginally, but I'm sure still had cable access and was gobbling up the drivel on Fox with a spoon. I consoled him with the fact that he was misinformed and that even I, an evil liberal, would not stand by for the distribution of autos for welfare.
demented maroons out there than we thought. The quality of education in this country is ever so much worse than I could imagine.
ultramaroons, savannah43.
BTW, our nation's system of education (IMHO) has been tailored to produce factory and service industry fodder. Sadly, those very individuals are most likely to embrace and promote conservative ideologies (thus avoiding that nasty cognitive dissonance I noted herein above).
(Quote):Trouble is, it hasn't really mattered. Even though news organizations debunked the claim, 45 percent of respondents to an NBC poll still believe the reforms would indeed allow the federal government to halt treatment to the elderly -- a staggering number.
Education cures the uninformed... there is no cure for stupidity !
And a lot of people choose to believe certain things if those things go to justify their cause.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
is not my fault, but that of someone else. I have not been given a fair chance in life."
and, the continued refusal of relevant parties to hold to the fire of justice the various feets of the Bush cabal is a true measure of how much our species externalizes responsibility for every thought, every utterance, every action...
I don't remember the quote and can't find it, but without a truly free press there is no democracy.
We no longer have a free press (save for the underground or the internet). Face facts, those venues do not reach enough of the population to make a difference. Not in the modern world of 24/7 cable "news".
Our democracy really is dying. That becomes clearer to me more and more each day. Unless we really find a way to push back on this, and doing it the traditional way of boycotts and letter writing is not working. Glen Beck is back on the air, and even more emboldened. That is a FACT. Unless we can somehow find a way to end this onslaught, we are pissing in the wind.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
... damn near everyone has bought into the Rush Limbaugh concept of free speech - that not only can one blather and spew, everyone else is obligated to give it equal consideration and treat it as valid.
Objective fact still makes value judgments. It has to. You can report the news objectively and still denounce fear-mongering as irresponsible twaddle. Instead, we give cracknoodles and walking lobotomy outpatients like Beck airtime.
is a widely held truism, probably originating with Jefferson (who, incidentally, tried to muzzle the press when it turned against him) and Madison:
The degradation of the media is really no different from other degradations throughout society. Short term vision, quick profits, bottom line ethics, what's good for me right now, ends justifying the means - all this type of thinking has slowly, or not so slowly degradated almost every aspect of our lives and almost all of us are responsible to some degree or another.
Agribusiness rendering the meaning of "organic" meaningless in order to maximize profits, calling stenography journalism, calling commerce art, reducing entertainment to voyeurism, politicans serving the corporate world versus the people in order to get re-elected, military thinking that it must destroy a people in order to save them, failure to hold those in positions of power responsible for their actions, and on and on and on are prime examples of the degradation. Almost nowhere on the "news" programs is it heard that when we as a society frame the arguments for or against torture in terms of whether it works or not then we have already lost.
We are slipping into a new "dark ages" and the sane will appear insane as more and more craziness takes hold as the norm and those forces that we rely on to stem that tide sit back and try to find ways to profit from it.
This isn't pretty, it's scary, and we all should be freightened to our marrow.
Wow.
For about twenty years, I have been telling just about anyone who will listen that we have been sliding ever more rapidly--indeed exponentially--into the abyss you've just described herein above!
That's a big reason why my friends and family treat me as though I am a mindless child (well, there's my unusual intellect, but I hesitate to mention THAT because it torques the few of C&L's regular bloggers who conflate intellect with hierarchy).
Being both an optimist and a macro-level gal, I remain hopeful that our tenure in the muck at the bottom of this abyss will help our entire species experience a spiritual quantum leap.
Please...don't ask me to remove my rose-colored glasses. After 53 years on this planet, I still prefer optimism.
"With most men, unbelief in one thing springs from blind belief in another."
Georg Christoph Lichtenberg (1742 - 1799)
(I still recommend the off switch)
"I know that there are people who do not love their fellow
man, and I hate people like that! " ~ Tom Lehrer (1928 - )
They can report on the attempt to spread misinformation. That should become the story. Ask the disseminators of misinformation if they are aware of the falsity of the claims, and then if they do not drop the story, truthsquad the liars.
... is the knee-jerk reaction to secure ratings. Station news directors routinely watch the competition, including cable outlets, to see what the lead story is.
Back in the 1990's, we had one news director who flinched every time a competing station did anything (he used to work there), and consequently introduced gimmicks like 'natural sound' and the 'no tripod rule' to show the energy and vitality of live news.
Problem is, what many people think of as natural sound (background noise in any environment) is audio mush. When we see a movie, we're listening to foley artists, not the natural sound. When a photographer shoots the three-alarm fire, he won't be getting the sound of crackling flames - he'll get the sound of the generator from the nearby fire truck.
Then there was the 'zooming map' horseshit inspired by the Gulf War smart bomb video, which is supposed to show the viewers how we're all over the market. (And, to show that there's nothing new in news, we're back to doing zooming maps off Google Earth.)
Next up: doing quality journalism with less resources.
The actual answer is a tad more proactive. When someone goes on a show espousing "death panels", or whatever the GOP lie of the moment happens to be, the Moderator has to, even at the risk of being "not even handed", tell them to their faces, "That is a lie".
The only person who even comes close is the ever schizophrenic Chris Matthews. And that apparently has to do with what he had for breakfast that morning or the house of the moon, because one day he holds peoples feet to the fire, and the next he is close to kissing Tom Delay on the lips.
However he is the toughest interviewer on television... but only about 20% of the time. But that 20% is valuable. He risks having people not come back on his show again, and that is what the rest of the talking heads will not do. So they tacitly enable lies, and often actively enable lies. "Death Panels" are the most recent and blatant example.
Regular newcasters also need to say that "Former Alaska Gov. today said, "(insert lie here)", but (insert non-FOX network here) has checked these claims and they are false. Not for partisan reasons, but call a lie a lie. If the Dems openly lie call them out too. All politicians stretch credibility with their talking points, but the GOP has learned that they can use this leeway to simply tell outright, provable lies. To have their own "version of the truth".
As they say, you are entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts.
Part of the problem is that people believe what they want to believe. The idiots who believe there are death panels want to believe it. As stupid as a death panel sound and as unbelievable as they may seem it is exactly what these jokers want to hear. Yoiu cannot stop teh stupid. It's just like the Birthers. It is insane to anybody who can think but these mental midgets want to believe it. If the dumbasses who started it were to say, "It's all a joke. We just made it up folks" the dumbasses would still believe it.
"They were so strong in their beliefs that there came a time when it hardly mattered what exactly those beliefs were; they all fused into a single stubbornness."
Louise Erdrich
(the party of no and oh noes!)
"I know that there are people who do not love their fellow
man, and I hate people like that! " ~ Tom Lehrer (1928 - )
n/t
now too many times to count...
the "market" has spoken: bad infotainment sells, baby.
as long as news journalism is secondary to profit, notions of 'news judgment' will always take a back seat--if even given a seat. there are rare times when good reporting and profit go hand-in-hand, but for the most part bad infotainment wins the day.
american news has become a vehicle to sell and to advertise, not inform.
Drama, fear, anger, hate, and sex sells. Since FOX can only exploit sex on the surface because of broadcast rules, they go full bore into fear and hate mongering. The result is rich rightwing commentators and a dumbed-down viewership. Propaganda that is being taken in as gospel will destroy a country from within. Hitler and Goebbels turned a majority of Germany's religious populous into hateful blithering idiots who advocated murder through racism and fascism. This is happening now on a "slightly" smaller scale.
LimpBalls
If I felt the information was suspicious, politically motivated or factually wrong (and I always checked!), I simply didn't use it. It really pissed off my editor, though. He kept saying it "wasn't fair" to the other side if I refused to print their lies. Guess that's why I never got promoted!
A former award-winning journalist and lifelong class warrior, keeping a jaundiced eye on the Washington elite.
I doubt that my fave S-I-L even reads a paper, I'm rather sure she just listens to Limbaugh, and others in her church....but I'm ashamed to say I just might have alienated her the other day. She hit me (and we had just had a very VERY bad day) with that 'death panel' and 'we won't have any insurance if Obama has his way' crap...I totally lost it. Totally.
I have been able to stave off all those 'remember the troops' stuff she wings towards my way -they are usually totally Right wanker...and irritating...but that comment just was the straw that broke the camel's back - so to speak.
But she lives in the deep South, and has spouted all that rightwanker garbage forever. And she's one of those great people who would literally give someone the shirt off her back....but she just can't get with it enough to actually think!.....*sigh*
"shirt off one's back" reason for allowing anyone to behave badly has worn thin with me, and many others that I know. It does not excuse the spewing and spreading of harmful lies and misinformation. I no longer take that kind of a statement as justification for anything, especially since I have NEVER seen anyone even asked for the shirt off their back, much less seen anyone actually give one up. This is a way to avoid confronting someone who needs to be confronted. Maybe they don't feel better after I return the favor and share my opinions with them after listening to theirs, but I feel better. To let lies go unchallenged is to condone them.
sister-in-law, if she wanted to keep our relationship civil, to cease with the emails until such time as she was prepared to receive the emails that I would send her way. I also told her I was deeply offended about her "evil liberal" bullshit and asked her to please explain to me how my father, who has personally raised over $1 million for Shriners' hospitals and who is and always has been a Democrat and a liberal, is a bad guy (I asked her if she would say it to his face, in which case I would happily set up a three-way call) and to find me even one of her so-called Christian conservatives that had raised as much money for charity. The emails stopped and we are at peace. My husband says she's mentally weak, he still loves her, but she' easily lead.
like Bloomberg news does it also, it's a conspirarcy and they are complicit in the corporate takeover of our democracy. They are all involved.
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/08/29/stimulus-...
however, it's going to take a huge effort to change the "present both sides, no matter how devoid of facts one side is" nature of news reporting. Blogs such as this calling journalists on their actions is a good step. Keep it up.
In the meantime, for those trying to push policy right now (such as health reform) it's imperative that progressives finally realize that journalist right now do not seek to report the truth, but rather report what is "interesting" or as they call it "newsworthy." Progressives tend to peddle logic and arguments and reasoning behind desired policy. What's thrown back is lies intended to evoke emotional responses to trump the logic and facts.
Progressives need not lie, but rather rely in the important emotions that lie behind sound policy.
Specifically, progressives and Democrats who go on TV need to talk about the fact that HEALTH IS A RIGHT, not a privilege and the private insurance system we have directly infringes upon this right. At minimum, we need a public option to enforce our right to health when private companies fail.
Second, we need to dispel the insane idea that the government has no role in protecting our basic rights, such as health. Should we stop the fire fighters battling the Station fire and the other fires in Southern California right now because it's an evil, government run system? Or should we acknowledge how crucial it is that the government provide such services to protect everyone and even the open spaces from danger. Ditto with the police.
But it all boils down to the emotional issue that can and should trump manufactured fear of "death panels": HEALTH IS A RIGHT AND PRIVATE INSURANCE TRAMPLES THAT RIGHT.
We need an era of big government again. Big democratically accountable government and fuck those who would deny progress.
Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity. Albert Einstein
is my email to Edward:
Hi, Edward,
How effective could be a letter writing campaign to call out the lying liars in today's media? I don't mean a small scale effort, I mean getting the hundreds of thousands of bloggers on Crooks and Liars, Daily Kos, Democratic Underground, and Media Matters (et al.) to actually write letters to those who are using various contemporary forms of media to disseminate lies, fear, hate, and resentment. We would only need a list of the ACTUAL snail mail addresses of these media menaces, and we could deluge their mailboxes with letters (using recycled paper whenever possible, of course).
Just think, this would be a win/win situation! The post office would get a boost in their revenue, and the egregious media menaces would not be able to simply hit the delete key to rid themselves of our myriad adjurations to embrace honesty in journalism. If these media menaces simply discard these letters, then intrepid activists could retrieve said discarded letters (one man's trash is another man's treasure...) to publicize in a different way this campaign's efforts to encourage truth in journalism.
What say you? I would be willing to be an integral part of this effort, and I'm sure there are many more like me willing to do this important work.
Warm regards,
Silence B. Damned
Who's ready to join me in this effort?
I agree that the ignore approach would be the best, as exemplified is the classic "flat earth" example. Someone claiming the earth was flat would never be reported on or get interviews. And even in an extreme case, say if someone shouted the claim out at the president with a bullhorn so that it couldn't be ignored, it certainly would never be reported as "Shape of the Earth is in Doubt", but rather "Unbalanced Person Shouts at the President".
But in real examples where just as ludicrous a claim is made, it gets enough "legit" attention that it gives clowns like Grassley all the cover they need to say, "Gee, maybe the shape IS in question!" So yes, if only this BS could be just ignored we'd all be better off. But, as Maher would say, not in this stupid country...
Comments are closed on this entry