Journalism : The Easiest Job In The World
I’ve got a long, pissy rant to unload at some point about my complete frustration with the traditional media, complacent Democratic dickheads in D.C., and the self-righteousness of the blogosphere, but I don’t have the energy or the time to write it all right now. In the meantime, one point that I wanna make, but probably wouldn’t be able to fit into the post that’s trying to assemble itself in my head is this : Is it just me or is journalism getting easier and easier? I don’t mean that as a partisan swipe, but a practical observation.
Fifty years ago, going through the public records or old newspapers would require a trip to the library or city hall, but now most information you need can be gathered online via government websites, Lexis-Nexis, and Google. With cell phones, journalists are no longer tied to a desk when they need to “work the phones” and their contacts are easier to reach than ever. With media consolidation, news bureaus have larger staffs and worldwide resources. And finally, blogger-triumphalism aside, the explosion of the blogosphere and alternative media sources provides dozens of interesting leads every day.
With that said, why does the media still fuck up all the time? Can it all be attributed to conservative bullying? Has technology made reporters so lazy that their spines have atrophied? Are they really so weak that they’ll repeat partisan spin verbatim without even a simple search on the internet? Fact checking doesn’t usually require a trip downtown these days, so what’s your excuse??
It’s no wonder the traditional media bashes blogs so much. It’s hard to have the humility to admit that you suck at your job.
9 comments
Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Of course we know that Fox does it on purpose. The others, I think, are in some sort of denial about the unconcious corporate genuflecting the media employs when setting the story agenda.
Employment, environment, wage structures and gorwth, pure vocational instruction (except for cooking)—all are totally ignored. Any other story that infringes on Holy Corporate American Health is always ignored, along with critical stories of themselves, of course.
Your piece ties into Greenwald’s of yesterday–the media hates this new criticism from the internet media sources. The media has always sucked, but now everybody can talk about it in a way that was nonexistent before.
It’s a corporate animal that has always sucked up to power and lied–Vietnam just one example, they blew that story for at least four years.
It also blew off Watergate–the list goes way long, they’ve always been terrible.
Now we all know. I thank god for the internet every day, I really do. Now I’m off to the joys of servlets, xsl and xml, ciao.
Comment by paradox — January 18, 2006 @ 5:17 am
But you know, it’s a little weird to see how the level of quality in lots of fields seems to be declining.
I’ve seen several independent articles from people saying, “Why don’t we have any intellectual giants anymore?”
(For example, the good, and short, “On Chomsky: a ‘Study in Total Depravity’ ”
http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/chomsky.html )
Every time I see or contemplate one of the great buildings or engineering projects of the 19th or 20th centuries, I think, “There’s no way that this could be built today.” (The Hoover Dam. The interstate highway system. The Panama Canal, for crissakes. Even train tracks — who would lay down 500 miles of new tracks today?)
I assume it’s probably just a perspective problem — the people in those days were probably saying the same thing — but nevertheless, it’s hard to shake.
Comment by anon — January 18, 2006 @ 6:33 am
It’s also easier to do media criticism. There’s a blogger for every little nit-picky issue that a MSM reporter must fit 15 of into a piece. MSMers are expected to get it right on all 15, and if they screw up on more than a few at one time they get their asses handed to them by bloggers.
Add to this that MSMers have to worry about their jobs, and the viability of their industry. Frickin’ volunteers are blowing their doors off night and day! Classified revenue is in the toilet! Retailer ads are the next to go, as online stores are racking up whatever sales Wal-Mart doesn’t make! Etc.
This leads to a lot of defensiveness and industry group-think. As long as they keep reinforcing their own, they think no one will notice. This defensiveness opens them up to conservative bullying. I say we bully them too, if that’s the only way to make them responsive. So I spend at least 10 minutes a day writing friendly-but-disappointed, detailed, incisive email to at least 1 journamalist.
Comment by miriamsong — January 18, 2006 @ 8:00 am
As an MSMer, I think a lot of focus needs to be focused on those above the editorial level. I’ve known many stories killed by editors who feared retribution from the advertising department, higher ups or the owner, if the owner’s friends were insulted.
(And, coming from Oklahoma, I’m sure you know I’m not kidding when I say the big paper is still full of people afraid of the ghost of the paper’s owner.)
On the ground level, yes, mistakes are made. Part of it has to do with ever-growing beats and a shortage of qualified reporters. Part of it has come from inane competition with local TV and the 24-hour news cycle. And some of it is just lazy reporting, which has always been there, but was never as easy to showcase and pass around than it is today.
It needs work and it’s important to the future of the country that the work is done. But there are a lot of things besides the MSM that fall under that description, too.
Comment by Dr. Pants — January 18, 2006 @ 9:20 am
If I may chime in on the same theme here, Big Journalism has always sucked, driven as it is by the need to sell stuff, at least during my lifetime, which is already unbearably long. You may be noticing it now because there is so goddamned much of it available these days, and, as previously mentioned, so many of us are taking advantage of easy and free online publishing to take potshots at their mistakes.
But we need them still, because we can’t all have first-hand access to news and newsmakers, so they have to represent us. I think they will soon learn how closely they’re being watched and how important it will be for them to be fearless and accurate.
The sooner the better.
Comment by Larry Jones — January 18, 2006 @ 1:01 pm
why does the media still fuck up all the time?
Good reasons given by all. However, allow me to distill it down to crude essence: no pressure/penalty for doing bad (“fucking up”); no reward for doing good. That is, in terms of historical, conventional Journalism.
Sadly, what used to be a profession with ethics and a prerequisite skill level (though not without its scuzzy, low-rent cousins on the periphery) has been displaced by profit-driven Infotainment.
In this age of Bread & Circuses, the scuzzy, low-rent cousins (e.g. Drudge) have taken over. The Public no longer cares about facts, the truth, or all sides of the story. The Public has morphed into full-time Consumer Nation that subsists on dirt, juice, dish, gossip, smear, smackdown, and shock value.
The old strictures of conventional Journalism mean nothing anymore–at least when it comes to pushing product, which now means everything.
We can do the innuendo
We can dance and sing
When it’s said and done
We haven’t told you a thing
We all know that CRAP IS KING
We love dirty laundry
Comment by freq flag — January 18, 2006 @ 11:04 pm
I think part of the problem comes from those “mainstream” sources that force unreasonable competition.
The eve of the 2000 election while votes were still being tallied in Florida Fox News announced without truly knowing that Bush had won over Gore. The other networks mystified decided that in the [at that point 50-50] chance that Fox turns out to be right they’ll look inept by comparison. If you look at the footage most other networks hoped on the bandwagon to save face.
In the end everyone was wrong because there was no way to know or tell. The drive to be the quickest was more important than actual fact.
In the 24 hour news cycle world, the the blogosphere churning out potential stories every minute it becomes more important to have the story first than to have it accurate.
Comment by robber_baron — January 19, 2006 @ 3:55 pm
Why don’t you all tell us how you REALLY FEEL??? :o)
Comment by Burt — January 19, 2006 @ 9:49 pm
Interesting. Go back fifty years to the work of George Seldes or I. F. Stone. They did a lot of reasearch, and as a result they produced writing that cut to the heart of the matter, provided new facts and ideas, and inspired thousands to do the right thing. Neither one was part of the MSM
Which MSM performers do we respect now? Only those, remnants of an earlier era, who stood up to McCarthy ( as in Good Night, and Good Luck).
The lesson is that the MSM has never been a source of inspiration and ready-made insight, but rather a starting point upon which all can agree: here is where the bare-minimum stupidity lies.
Let’s see where we can go from here.
The point is, reporting isn’t getting easier. They’re just getting lazier, because even if we catch them it doesn’t matter. Now, why doesn’t it matter? That’s a good question. Is it our fault? No? Then whose?
Comment by Joe — January 20, 2006 @ 3:10 am