First it was the telephone company – way back, when there was only one. Then it was the cable television companies. Now it’s the airlines. Can the mainstream media be far behind?
Yes, one after another, America’s floundering business empires have discovered that customers really are important after all. And not just any customers, mind you. Happy customers!
Most of these enterprises, before they get serious about improving their product or service, stumble upon the consumer’s “Bill of Rights” idea (or a consultant sells it to their clueless management).
Since a recent Gallup poll found that less than half of Americans trust the mass media to get it right, we may see some action here soon. But the real story is in the partisan divide, where “exactly half as many Republicans as Democrats say they have a great deal or a fair amount of trust in the news media. Independents tend to be closer to the largely cynical views of Republicans than to the more trusting views of Democrats.” (Ah, yes – “cynical” Republican views. Even stories covering media bias are infected with, well, media bias.)
On the off chance (was that a pig that just flew by?) Big Media are interested in developing a consumer’s “Bill of Rights,” here are a few suggestions for getting started:
- The truth actually does exist and you have a right to it, as best we can uncover it. Any reporter, editor or broadcaster manipulating facts or obscuring evidence will be terminated immediately.
- You have a right to know whether you are reading/viewing/hearing news or opinion. “Analysis,” which leads to opinion, will not be published as “news.”
- You have a right to follow-on coverage that may materially affect a story we reported earlier.
- You have a right to corrections displayed with the same prominence as the original article. Reporters with frequent “corrections” will be terminated.
- You have a right to know if reporters, editors or broadcasters are married to, dating, sleeping with, suing or otherwise involved with government, business, academia or other interests that we report on. Ditto for “experts” we quote in these stories. These connections invariably affect news coverage in ways we cannot recognize or predict. You, the news consumer, are the ultimate judge of the importance of these relationships. We promise to inform you of them, and to terminate violators.
- You have a right to know how a story originated. Was it a special interest group press release? Or did we identify and develop the story on our own?
- “Fake but accurate” reporting has no place in our news room. Are you listening, Dan?
- Plagiarism, also known as reporters too lazy to make up their own stories (see Fake but Accurate, above), has no place in our newsroom. Violators will be terminated.
- “Spin doctors” are the wrong prescription for the newsroom. They will stay on the opinion pages.
A few corollaries:
- Truth does not necessarily emerge after presentation of the two most extreme views available, even if the headline makes the editor happy. Multiple views may be necessary to present a balanced story.
- Truth is not a compromise between extreme views. Sometimes one view is entirely right, and the other entirely wrong. Sometimes neither view is correct.
- Journalism is too important to be done by journalists: it should be done by real people. Relying on recruits trained in academia’s socialist, taxpayer-supported, anti-American enclaves may diminish your audience among those actually accustomed to working for a living and paying for things – like newspapers.
Related special offer:
“Stop the Presses: The Inside Story of the New Media Revolution”
