The times are changing. The media is struggling to keep up.
I realize the “media” is a loaded term. At this point it basically means “information I don’t like”. The reporters and networks and websites we consume are informational and fair. The other stuff is “the media”. I get it. But I’m not talking about a person or a newsroom. I’m talking about the concept of information gathering.
Let’s talk about Jay Cutler. Jay Cutler has been the average-at-best quarterback for the Chicago Bears. Let’s pretend that Jay Cutler gives an interview tomorrow to Sports Illustrated. He makes some statements.
“I’m going to win the MVP next year.”
This isn’t true or untrue. It’s a statement of belief. It’s not based on facts. It’s not provable. We can come back to him a year later, check on the results, and call him either a fortune-teller or a liar. Neither one would be true. Either outcome is coincidence. Reporting that quote would be interesting but not especially meaningful. We’d make jokes on social media but the consensus would be that he’s either confident or dumb.
“I’m the best quarterback in the NFL.”
This is untrue but it’s not a lie. We know it’s untrue because we have statistics and data from reputable sources that tell us otherwise. His rating isn’t as good as others. He doesn’t have as many wins. But it’s not a lie. It’s still, at its core, based in part on non-statistical metrics. Maybe he’d be as good as Tom Brady if he played in New England. Maybe he’d be as good as Drew Brees if he played for Sean Payton. Maybe he meant he’s the best at a certain thing and it was taken out of context. Not true and not a lie.
“I threw for 5,000 yards last year.”
This is a lie. He didn’t. We can look at actual statistics, measured by professionals, and see that’s not true. It’s verifiably inaccurate. If he’s joking that’s ok. If he’s not it’s a lie. NFL reporters would not run that line without also mentioning that the actual facts show something else.
Sports reporters know how to handle that. Report the facts. (Jay Cutler thinks he’s the top NFL QB) Attack the lie. (1,500 yarder pretends to have thrown for 5,000) Ridicule the rest. (Absurdly says he’ll win MVP)
Political reporters are having a really hard time with this. In politics media is taught to treat statements from officials as fact and that to publicly question truth is taking sides. Columnists write opinion pieces. Reporters present facts without commentary. (Many people get this confused and yell at a Columnist for not being neutral. That’s not the job) Over time reporters have become de-facto mouthpieces for those in power. They repeat claims without question. That concept doesn’t work anymore.
In the past week we’ve had all the above examples from the White House.
“I’m going to win the MVP next year,” has become, “I’m going to be the greatest jobs president God ever created.” This can’t be proven. We could go back in a year and say the President was a fortune-teller or a liar, but it’s meaningless. We have to wait and see if this is true or not. It’s hyperbole that demands attention, but discussing and addressing is a waste of time.
“I’m the best quarterback in the NFL,” has become, “I would have won the popular vote if not for 3 – 5 million votes from illegals.” I think it’s interesting how this changed from “illegal votes” to “votes from illegals”. The language on this seems flexible. I’m still not clear if he believes that American citizens voted multiple times or if he thinks that someone who was not a citizen voted. Either way, he appears to think that only the Democratic candidate received this support and that every single vote for him was legal. This is despite the fact that three of the five arrests for voter fraud were his supporters, the other two did not state their preference, and that the Washington Post investigation showed that from 2000 – 2014 there were a potential of 31 fraudulent votes out of the more than 1 billion cast. The correct way to address this, as some have done, is to say, “This is impossible to disprove, but based on all statistical evidence we have, this is an inaccurate and dangerous thing to say.” Again, some have taken this tact. Others are still simply saying, “The President claimed…” without introducing truth.
“I threw for 5,000 yards last year,” has become, “There were 1.5 million people there. It was the most watched inauguration in history. Period.” This is a lie. We can look at actual evidence and see this is a lie. The correct response is to laugh, refuse to print the lie and ask why the speaker has any credibility if he is willing to spew falsehoods this freely.
So how should this be handled? If the White House presents information that is, at best, impossible to prove, and likely a complete falsehood, how is it to be addressed? I think the answer is a combination of what the New York Times and CNN have done. The current administration is not to be given the benefit of the doubt. We should not assume that they are providing accurate information or have any intention of doing so. CNN didn’t carry a press conference from the White House press secretary. They waited to review the content, provide editorial feedback and then introduce what was shared. The NY Times has taken to adding fact checking articles for each statement made by the administration.
These are, unfortunately, necessary steps to take.
We, consumers of media, also have necessary steps to take. I keep reading about the need to “get outside the bubble” and listen to different points-of-view. That’s absolutely true. If your only voice of news is Breitbart you are ill-informed. If your only source is OccupyDemocrats you are ill-informed. But the answer isn’t to read both of them. You would still be ill-informed. They’re sensational. They’re poorly reported. Contrary to popular opinion, there are unbiased news sources. NPR. The Washington Post. The Economist. The Guardian. These are relatively straight news-gathering entities that will keep you informed and avoid most sensational and salacious nonsense. But let’s wait and see. Let’s see who speaks truth to power. Let’s see who is willing to challenge the administration to ensure that the American people get accurate information. Those are the people who will deserve your attention, your focus and your subscription dollars.
The fourth estate has a duty. Repeating what people say without verification is a job. There are people who have that job. That’s called public relations. Holding those in power accountable to ensure the benefit of the people is a different job. Please make sure you’re doing the right one.
jamesvanells 