Thanks much for running my latest piece, The Contrarian. The mainstream media is failing us as a society. So much more to say about this. Join me at https://theystandcorrected.substack.com!
"Inside news agencies, many reporters and editors don’t even realize that Republican administrations routinely add more to the debt."
If anyone at a news agency and/or many reporters and editors "don't even realize" this fact, they need to be fired immediately, because they are just as ignorant as the maga base.
There are sooo many things that reporters and editors don't know about, but report on anyway. The key isn't for them to know everything in advance of working on a story, obviously, but for them to instinctively fact check any claim they consider reporting. Sadly, the "open mic" philosophy overtook the media. https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/p/its-time-to-end-news-open-mic-nights
I don't expect any reporter/editor/agency to know anything IN ADVANCE, but I do expect them to know and realize things like rethuglicons routinely adding to the national debt, after the fact. There are many examples like that, but then, of course no right-wing "news" organization would have any employees and the billionair/legacy media would be empty like The Washington Post is now.
Sorry to be commenting 5 days late, but today is when I had time to read Josh. I understand how you feel. I went through a period when I felt like journalists are all idiots. Then, I read somewhere that working journalists tend to be YOUNG. That's when it began to make sense. For those of us who have lived through multiple presidents, it's freaking obvious that Republican administrations routinely add enormously to the national debt. We've lived it. But for people who haven't lived that long, the only way they know is if they research the question adequately. I don't know what exactly they teach in journalism school, but my guess is that young journalists often don't realize that they need to research broadly and historically as well as for the current details. Another example: I saw a young journalist's obituary for Jackie Onassis. She was comparing Jackie to Melania Trump, essentially making them out to be similar, and it was awful. The journalist had no idea how different the two women were. She hadn't even looked up their very different educational backgrounds. But more than that, could she readily understand just how different attitudes were toward women in Jackie's time as first lady compared to Melania? The cultural-historical milieu is as much part of the story as the other details. Josh will know how journalists are trained to deal with that, but I don't.
OMG, can you please send the link for that obituary? I need to read that myself. I can't imagine ANYONE being so ignorant as to compare these two women. They have absolutely NOTHING in common. All I can find is that the orange dumpster is comparing his wife to Jackie and that Melania channels (I call that "copies") Jackie in her choice of clothing.
Jackie was a lady, Melania is a woman who was a nude model and came to the US under false pretense - a genius visa, one mght call that lying. Oh wait, the dumpsters do have something in common.
Sorry for the late reply. I had not been checking messages here. Thinking about it, it was an article that appeared during Trump's first term, so it couldn't have been Jackie's obituary. But it was, rather, one of those "both sides are equal" media coverages of Melania as first lady compared to Jackie as first lady. It's possible it was in the NYT or in WaPo because I was subscribing to both at the time. I no longer subscribe to either of them, so I can't search their archives now. It was positively revolting to me to read, knowing that Jackie was a top college student, a journalist, a woman who lived through a tragic presidential assassination, etc. -- and Melania none of those things.
"News giants have lost Americans’ trust by failing to do the job: provide the truth, always."
That is only part of the problem. That these sources in the media not only not tell the truth, they don't confront the lies that they quote and debunk them. In other words, they give the liars a pass.
There is also a problem of finance. We have so many ways of getting the news now that the slice of money for every individual source is smaller. In going for clicks and profits, important stories and information are often not covered, which brings up another point. News used to be more of a public service and less of a cash cow. A definite re-think and realignment is due.
"What if it stopped rushing to tell audiences what people said, and instead investigated whether what they said was accurate?" I was going to ask if that was somehow different from the accountability journalism outlets that already exist but that no one seems to care about - Snopes, Politifact, factcheck.org, etc. I appreciate and support them, but also understand they have their own share of hate mail, and their own difficulties staying afloat because truth-seeking is just not lucrative.
Great question! I'm not talking about only fact checking what people say. I'm talking about making fact-checking part of the news process. So all the mainstream news agencies, before publishing or airing anything, should fact check. It should be standard.
Since becoming a paid Contrarian subscriber, I will never again tune in Legacy Media for factual news!! Happy to read that bozo Bezos WaPo is floundering ……. I’m one woman who is boycotting Amazon!!
You'll never achieve public trust by exclusively finding things to condemn. If you want trust, you do need that side of things for accountability, but you also need to spend twice as much time finding things to praise and uphold. If there isn't a paper you're ready to praise, it could be articles, columns, writers, departments, etc. Find the best things and make people aware of them. Relentlessly and frequently.
Yes!! Your analysis nails what "news" has become -- the "he said" / "she said" sort of reporting, which build conflict and does not get to the bottom of an issue's verity, does not shine a light on what needs to be illumined. Throughout my youth, the legendary, great Walter Cronkite ended each of his broadcasts with his statement, "And that's the way it is." No one in mainstream media is doing any kind of investigative work, digging through the dirt to get to the truth.
Physical newspapers are largely "old news," yes. But big mainstream media are still enormously powerful. Podcasts and other media nearly always cite claims from media giants as though they're accurate, and then offer opinions based on those claims. When the claims aren't facts, these other forms of media help to spread lies. We need a truth countermovement. https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/p/the-citizen-journalist-double-standard
Thanks much for running my latest piece, The Contrarian. The mainstream media is failing us as a society. So much more to say about this. Join me at https://theystandcorrected.substack.com!
"Inside news agencies, many reporters and editors don’t even realize that Republican administrations routinely add more to the debt."
If anyone at a news agency and/or many reporters and editors "don't even realize" this fact, they need to be fired immediately, because they are just as ignorant as the maga base.
There are sooo many things that reporters and editors don't know about, but report on anyway. The key isn't for them to know everything in advance of working on a story, obviously, but for them to instinctively fact check any claim they consider reporting. Sadly, the "open mic" philosophy overtook the media. https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/p/its-time-to-end-news-open-mic-nights
I don't expect any reporter/editor/agency to know anything IN ADVANCE, but I do expect them to know and realize things like rethuglicons routinely adding to the national debt, after the fact. There are many examples like that, but then, of course no right-wing "news" organization would have any employees and the billionair/legacy media would be empty like The Washington Post is now.
Sorry to be commenting 5 days late, but today is when I had time to read Josh. I understand how you feel. I went through a period when I felt like journalists are all idiots. Then, I read somewhere that working journalists tend to be YOUNG. That's when it began to make sense. For those of us who have lived through multiple presidents, it's freaking obvious that Republican administrations routinely add enormously to the national debt. We've lived it. But for people who haven't lived that long, the only way they know is if they research the question adequately. I don't know what exactly they teach in journalism school, but my guess is that young journalists often don't realize that they need to research broadly and historically as well as for the current details. Another example: I saw a young journalist's obituary for Jackie Onassis. She was comparing Jackie to Melania Trump, essentially making them out to be similar, and it was awful. The journalist had no idea how different the two women were. She hadn't even looked up their very different educational backgrounds. But more than that, could she readily understand just how different attitudes were toward women in Jackie's time as first lady compared to Melania? The cultural-historical milieu is as much part of the story as the other details. Josh will know how journalists are trained to deal with that, but I don't.
OMG, can you please send the link for that obituary? I need to read that myself. I can't imagine ANYONE being so ignorant as to compare these two women. They have absolutely NOTHING in common. All I can find is that the orange dumpster is comparing his wife to Jackie and that Melania channels (I call that "copies") Jackie in her choice of clothing.
Jackie was a lady, Melania is a woman who was a nude model and came to the US under false pretense - a genius visa, one mght call that lying. Oh wait, the dumpsters do have something in common.
Sorry for the late reply. I had not been checking messages here. Thinking about it, it was an article that appeared during Trump's first term, so it couldn't have been Jackie's obituary. But it was, rather, one of those "both sides are equal" media coverages of Melania as first lady compared to Jackie as first lady. It's possible it was in the NYT or in WaPo because I was subscribing to both at the time. I no longer subscribe to either of them, so I can't search their archives now. It was positively revolting to me to read, knowing that Jackie was a top college student, a journalist, a woman who lived through a tragic presidential assassination, etc. -- and Melania none of those things.
I keep askin' why someone (like you) can't put together a takeover (if need be hostile) over national media ouitlets?
That would be great! Have a spare billion dollars? :) https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/p/media-money-mess
"News giants have lost Americans’ trust by failing to do the job: provide the truth, always."
That is only part of the problem. That these sources in the media not only not tell the truth, they don't confront the lies that they quote and debunk them. In other words, they give the liars a pass.
There is also a problem of finance. We have so many ways of getting the news now that the slice of money for every individual source is smaller. In going for clicks and profits, important stories and information are often not covered, which brings up another point. News used to be more of a public service and less of a cash cow. A definite re-think and realignment is due.
Yup. I address all of these points and more over at https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/ Let's discuss there!
"What if it stopped rushing to tell audiences what people said, and instead investigated whether what they said was accurate?" I was going to ask if that was somehow different from the accountability journalism outlets that already exist but that no one seems to care about - Snopes, Politifact, factcheck.org, etc. I appreciate and support them, but also understand they have their own share of hate mail, and their own difficulties staying afloat because truth-seeking is just not lucrative.
Great question! I'm not talking about only fact checking what people say. I'm talking about making fact-checking part of the news process. So all the mainstream news agencies, before publishing or airing anything, should fact check. It should be standard.
Fact-checking used to be done by a staff who have long been victims to budget cuts. They are no longer there.
Staff cuts can be a huge problem. But fact checking should be a basic step for all journalists, not just an add-on by other staffers once stories are prepared. :( https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/i/185413911/a-journalist-fact-checking-should-be-as-routine-as-a-dental-technician-cleaning-teeth
Let’s face it — the entire WORLD is walking on eggshells with regard to truth-telling.
— Because the man in the biggest bully pulpit has the thinnest skin & wields the biggest cudgel.
Tell a truth that he finds inconvenient & you get sued the next day!
— He is waging a war on truth & decency, therefore today’s journalists can be considered wartime correspondents.
But he walked through a gaping hole that already existed in the media landscape. An addiction to outrage fodder, rather than a strict adherence to truth, gave him space. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/episode-90-rage-machine/id1739637144?i=1000745092592
That addiction seems more pronounced in rightwing news outlets such as Fox,
— the Aussies tried to get Murdoch voted off their island but he’s been given free rein in the U.S.
— if it bleeds it leads’ has long been the news MO … I can’t listen to your podcast just now but will do so later.
Since becoming a paid Contrarian subscriber, I will never again tune in Legacy Media for factual news!! Happy to read that bozo Bezos WaPo is floundering ……. I’m one woman who is boycotting Amazon!!
I hear you! Feel free to come join me over at https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/ as well!
You'll never achieve public trust by exclusively finding things to condemn. If you want trust, you do need that side of things for accountability, but you also need to spend twice as much time finding things to praise and uphold. If there isn't a paper you're ready to praise, it could be articles, columns, writers, departments, etc. Find the best things and make people aware of them. Relentlessly and frequently.
Yes!! Your analysis nails what "news" has become -- the "he said" / "she said" sort of reporting, which build conflict and does not get to the bottom of an issue's verity, does not shine a light on what needs to be illumined. Throughout my youth, the legendary, great Walter Cronkite ended each of his broadcasts with his statement, "And that's the way it is." No one in mainstream media is doing any kind of investigative work, digging through the dirt to get to the truth.
Sadly, the newspaper model is obsolete. Podcasts are the successor media.
Physical newspapers are largely "old news," yes. But big mainstream media are still enormously powerful. Podcasts and other media nearly always cite claims from media giants as though they're accurate, and then offer opinions based on those claims. When the claims aren't facts, these other forms of media help to spread lies. We need a truth countermovement. https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/p/the-citizen-journalist-double-standard