Journalism is dying

Journalism has never been easy. When I was an undergraduate student, I originally intended to get a double major in communication and political science. I reasoned that would give me the understanding necessary to effective on both sides of the political events curtain. But after taking a variety of journalism classes, I concluded that journalism wasn't for me because I wanted to share my opinion freely and journalism, as I had been taught, was issue neutral. So, I stuck with the minor and moved on.

Fast forward about twenty years and we now have a very different paradigm. There are very few "journalists" whose political preferences I am unable to ascertain by simply listening to them speak or reading their words. That, I would contend, is not how it should be.

When Walter Cronkite told a story, the viewer didn't know if he was happy to report it or disgusted. He always kept his personally feelings out of the work he did. Many of the contemporaries in American media don't even appear to try to do so. Their disdain for one issue or one person become palatable. They parade the scalps of political adversaries around like championship winning team might a trophy. Its disgusting and bad for journalism and bad for democracy.

These "journalists" claim they are just holding people accountable, but are they really? I don't think so. What they are doing is subjective and agenda seeking. Rather than direct their ire indiscriminately, they pick and choose whom to be critique and with how much vigor.

Take for example a local print reporter who seems hell bent on destroying any man she deems behind the times of her feminist ideology. Her stories regularly talk about issues she is clearly passionate about such abortion rights, equal pay for women and other such causes. She is drawn to the slightest hint of misogyny or psuedo-misogyny like a shark to drop of blood. Once she gets the scent, she is relentless. She will dig and dig until a story is created, even when one does not exist. And why? Certainly it is not to serve the public's interests.

Let's be clear, this happens on all sides of the political spectrum. I consume a lot of media from a variety of sources. I agree with some and disagree with others. My goal, as a news consumer, is not to agree, but instead to better understand not just what is being thought, but how and why. As I follow peddlers of opinion disguised as news, trends become clear, just as it clear that no "side" is immune.

You see, journalism is dying. As the readership and viewership continues to decline and unsustainable business model collapses under its own deteriorating weight, the powers that be in contemporary media are grasping for any straw, no matter how weak and no matter how foolhardy. The dramatic shift towards the subjectivity of the news product it delivers is the main entree of the menu entitled, "how to kill an otherwise noble profession."

There are a plethora of studies and reports that speak to the dire nature of media industry. Newsrooms are being cut in half or more on a regular basis. Media oligarchs are pushing harder and harder for anything that might save their dwindling empires. All the while, the American public is divided and distrusts. Surveys by Pew and Gallup, and many more, speak to the amazing level of distrust Americans have in the media, especially those in the center and the right of the ideological spectrum.

Regrettably, I don't believe a course correction is likely. Allowing so-called journalists to be simultaneously activists has let a genie out of a bottle with no intentions of ever going back in. Calls to objectivity would be met with revolt and claims of censorship or the defanging of the media. As Mr. Cronkite insightfully observed, "Objective journalism and the opinion column are about as similar as the Bible and Playboy magazine." Amen.