What are we doing? Does it all even matter? Does anyone even believe us? These are all questions plaguing journalists across the nation. In a world of misinformation, conspiracy theorists, and an administration launching an all-out war on the Fourth Estate, is our mission to inform and reveal a dying field? In recent weeks, NBC has cleaned house, and the Associated Press has effectively been banned from the White House press pool, for failing to acknowledge the “Gulf of America.” Never mind our careers as working journalists—have we entered the end times of the last guard-rail against tyranny, at least in the United States?
“For decades, a group of D.C.-based journalists, the White House Correspondents’ Association, has long dictated which journalists get to ask questions of the president of the United States in these most intimate spaces. Not anymore, “said Karoline Leavitt in a White House press briefing. Historically, presidents or anyone in power have had an adversarial relationship with the press, but in the modern era, it seems that those who have the biggest opinions about the free press are those who consume it—the people.
As journalists, we are taught to be the voice of the voiceless, to hold accountable those who govern the people, and to ensure that the people stay informed. However, with the advent of social media and clickbait reporting, trustworthy journalists have fallen to the wayside, branded as “fake news.” The problem -it seems-when presented with factual evidence—regardless of our efforts to be unbiased—our work is immediately labeled as fake, accused of crazed liberal/conservative bias, or just plain lies if the information doesn’t align with the viewpoints of the consumers. Furthermore, opinion shows and the 24-hour news cycle have left many Americans confused about what exactly they are taking in (what you’re reading now is an opinion, just to clarify).
Journalism, once an admired profession, has been tarnished by the ever-evolving medium and slew of information now available to anyone at anytime. Some can argue that the consumers of media are to blame, but perhaps the blame lies within the industry itself. The nature of “if it bleeds, it leads” has left many news organizations hungry to break stories as fast as they unfold, regardless of fact-checking.
The profession is rooted in the very First Amendment, yet long gone are the gold standards of Walter Cronkite, Bob Woodward, and Dan Rather, whose misstep in presenting false information in 2005 came with a heavy price by CBS—a mere oversight in today’s media realm. But how did we get here? We can perhaps look at the Fairness Doctrine, which, in its time, required that all media outlets devote equal time to opposing viewpoints. However, under the Reagan administration, the Fairness Doctrine met its demise. “The Fairness Doctrine remained the standard for decades before it stopped being enforced during the Reagan administration and was removed from the Federal Register during the Obama administration,” writes Ian Klein in the Hastings Communication and Entertainment Law Journal. “Since the Fairness Doctrine’s disappearance, the perception by conservatives and progressives alike has been that major media outlets display overt biases towards one political affiliation or the other,” Klein continues. Opinion shows and partisan networks have all blurred the lines of who to believe rather that what.
In recent days, the ill-fated meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, President Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance, left the American people shocked. A debate about suits was blown out of proportion, incited by a journalist who asked why Zelensky didn’t wear one, allowing the Vice President to immaturely pounce on Zelensky. In its wake, the narrative is attempting to be manipulated to imply that Zelensky, who has been battling an unprovoked war with Russia, was responsible for the plight of the Ukrainian people. Although the writing on the wall suggests that this is an attempt – by the Trump Administration – to use the free press as a public relations tool to change the narrative of the Ukrainian war, are the American people, regardless of their positions, able to hear the alarm bells of what this could mean for our democracy, or have they finally gone tone deaf?
With the demise of the Fairness Doctrine and the constant shoveling of s**t and calling it sugar, have we failed the American people as journalists, or have power-hungry tyrants finally found a way to infiltrate and manipulate the Fourth Estate?
As journalists, we strive to be the very best—accurate, transparent and committed to delivering our work. But in the modern-era when we sound the alarm, but have lost the trust of the American people, is the effort of our commitment even believed? Perhaps it has already fallen in this American nightmare.
“It is the duty of the journalist to report what is happening, not to shape what is happening.” — Edward R. Murrow
