The task of
navigating the maze between fact and opinion in the news media is often
difficult. Over the past two years I have carefully studied the news media and
have developed a system classifying journalists into four categories. I hope
this system is useful to those of you who wish to better understand the news
media.
Editorialists
Editorialists
are explicit in the fact that they are giving you their opinion on an issue of
public policy. They are often easy to recognize. Editorialists can be found in
the opinion section of a newspaper, during primetime on Fox News and MSNBC, and
on talk radio. They also appear as contributors on news shows on CNN and the
Sunday Morning News shows. Editorialists will use facts to support their
position, so even they do not rely completely upon opinion.
Editorialists
are prone to factual errors that support their position. Rachel
Maddow falsely said that we spend more than the rest of the world combined
on the military because she supports cutting the military budget. George
Will falsely said that the stimulus did not create jobs because he opposes
federal spending to jumpstart the economy. It is possible that both believed
the falsehoods they stated. If that is the case, it is because those falsehoods
reinforce their positions.
Worldview
Reporters
Worldview
Reporters present themselves as Neutral Reporters, but their worldview comes
through in their reporting. Worldview Reporters are commonly found on
television, especially on cable news. This is due, in part, to the nature of
the medium of television. Television journalism shows the reporter asking the
question, print journalism does not. News channels classify the programs hosted
by Worldview Reporters as news shows rather than opinion programs. Worldview
Reporters are able to conduct highly insightful interviews with newsmakers they
disagree with. Andrea Mitchell, Megyn Kelly, and Shepard Smith are examples of
Worldview Reporters.
Andrea
Mitchell
Andrea
Mitchell did a great interview
with former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. The interview was tough and
included the quip, “Mr. Secretary, you know what stove-piping means.”
Andrea passionately
interviewed
Nancy Brinker, the founder of the Susan G. Komen foundation which provides financial
assistance to women diagnosed with Brest Cancer. The Komen foundation had
decided to stop providing assistance to Planned Parenthood, which provides
women’s health services including breast exams and other breast health services,
because Planned Parenthood also performs abortions. During the interview,
Andrea said, “I come to you today, you know, expressing the anger of a lot of
people, channeling though them, you see it on twitter, you see it everywhere.”
The
interview was discussed on Reliable
Sources. Michelle Cottle pointed out that the issue was personal to Andea,
she had been diagnosed with breast cancer the previous year. Matt Lewis argued
that it was political; conservatives aggressively oppose Planned Parenthood because
the organization is an abortion provider. I agree with Matt that it showed
Andrea’s view on a politically motivated decision by the Komen foundation. I
disagree with him that that is a bad thing. I believe that journalists should
be able to show their worldview in their reporting, and I support that ability regardless
of what their position is.
Andrea
produced a lean
forward ad for MSNBC where she states her opposition to Republican
proposals (although they are never described as such) that claim to prevent voter
fraud. Many liberals believe that these policies are actually attempts at voter
suppression. In the ad she says, “I think it’s a real scandal that political
parties and interest groups are trying to prevent people from voting.”
Megyn Kelly
Megyn interviewed
state senator Jon Erpenbach about the decision he and his Democratic colleges
made to leave the state in order to prevent Scott Walker from having the quorum
necessary to vote on his budget. Walker’s Wisconsin budget proposal included
language removing collective bargaining rights for public sector unions. Megyn’s
interview was tough. She said, “People now know [about the debate over bargaining
rights] and now they’re saying you’ve got to go back and do your job and you can
vote yes or you can vote no but you have to go do your job. It’s not your job
to leave the state and cower in Illinois instead of facing up to the vote.”
Megyn interviewed
a Texas professor about his proposal to create a system of affirmative action
for ugly people in the workplace. She did a good job asking him about the potential
drawbacks of such a plan including, “Are you comfortable creating an entirely
new class of victim to clog up our court system?”
Megyn confronted
a regular guest on her show who criticized her maternity leave, calling it a “racket.”
Her response included the statement, “The United States is the only country in
the advanced world that doesn’t require paid maternity leave. If anything
America is in the dark ages when it comes to maternity leave.” This appeared to
contradict previous things she had said in the past including, “Do you think that
there is any getting the tentacles that government has placed into our lives
out?” Jon Stewart pointed out this contradiction in an incredibly hilarious
segment entitled Lactate
Intolerance.
Shepherd
Smith
While
covering President Obama’s endorsement of gay marriage, Shep asked
his college Bret Baier, “What I’m most curious about is whether it’s your
belief that in this time of rising debts and medical issues and all the rest,
if Republicans would go out on a limb and try to make this a campaign issue while sitting very firmly, without much
question, on the wrong side of history on it?”
After
reading Mitt Romney’s cordial response to Newt Gingrich leaving the
presidential race, after a hostile primary Shep said, “Politics is weird…
and creepy, and now I know lacks even the loosest attachment to anything like
reality.”
Shepard
Smith blasted
the Senators who voted against funding health care for 9/11 first responders. “And
we’re not even going to give them medicine for the illnesses they got down
there? It’s disgusting, it’s a national disgrace, it’s a shame and everybody
who voted against should have to stand up and account for himself or herself.” In
a later segment Shep read
off the names of the senators who failed to provide him a statement explaining
their vote against the 9/11 first responders bill.
Neutral
Reporters
Neutral
Reporters believe that it is their job to tell you the news, not what to think
of the news. They avoid any statement that would even hint at what their
position on an issue would be or where they fall on the political spectrum. Chuck
Todd is an example of a Neutral Reporter. C-SPAN is another example of neutral
reporting.
Howard Kurts
hosts Reliable Sources, a media criticism show. Media criticism is inherently opinionated,
media content is either judged to be fair or unfair, trustworthy or not. Thus
Howard Kurts is an editorialist, but applies the values of the Neutral Reporter
to his analysis. This can be seen when he criticized
Wisconsin journalists who had signed a recall against Scott Walker. Kurt said, “I
can’t fathom how these journalists failed to recognize that supporting a move
to kick a Republican governor out of office would be seen as blatantly
political.”
I disagree. I believe that it is beyond unreasonable to assume that journalists don’t have opinions on the political issues they cover. I do not believe that journalists should have to give up their basic constitutional rights in order to do their job. Thus I think that journalists should be allowed to sign a recall petition. They should also be allowed to participate in occupy protests or tea party rallies, communist marches or libertarian potlucks. That is why I disagree with the decision by WNYC, an NPR station, to fire Caitlin Curran, a web producer, because she participated in an Occupy protest.
To be clear,
I have great respect for Howard Kurtz and enjoy Reliable Sources. I just have a
different philosophy when it comes to my belief in what is appropriate conduct
for journalists.
One of the
common mistakes Neutral Reporters make is to create a false balance. The view
that humans are not responsible for global warming is given equal
weight to the view that humans are responsible for global warming. Never
mind that over 97
percent of climate scientists believe that humans are responsible. One side
says there are death
panels in health care reform; the other side says there aren’t. He said/She
said. Nevermind the truth. Not all Neutral Reporters fall into this trap, but
many do.
Factcheckers
The final group
of journalists are factcheckers. They rate the relative truth of statements made
by politicians. They also track how a politician’s position on a topic changes
over time and if they keep their promises. Examples of factcheckers include Politifact, the Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler, and Anderson Cooper. Many journalists fail
to check the claims of politicians because the task is often difficult and sometimes
involves complicated issues. Sometimes factcheckers get a ruling wrong,
but most of the time they get it right.
Postscript:
Jon Stewart also gave a tough informative interview with Donald
Rumsfeld. He did a segment titled “Fox
News: The New Liberals” making fun of how the views on protests and criticizing
the government changed after the presidency transitioned from Republican to
Democratic control. He did another segment criticizing Megyn Kelly for denying
that Fox News personalities call those they disagree with Nazis.
Jon Stewart fits into the Editorialist category.
No comments:
Post a Comment