A Media Led Coup

Every now and then I see a television commercial for a rehabilitation program that begins by informing us addiction is “a disease like any other.”  This is a manta that has been repeated for decades.  Nonetheless, it keeps being recycled.

Why?  Because it does not work.  And it doesn’t because it is untrue.  Were addiction a disease like any other, they would not have to say so.  No one does this for the measles.  Everyone knows this is a genuine disease without it having to be drummed into our ears.

Although an addiction to heroin or alcohol can cause physiological damage, drug dependency begins with a voluntary action.  A person does not catch these habits the way he catches a cold.  The problem may be real, but the causes are different.

Now we have The New York Times assuring us that if we want the truth about what is going on in our country, we should read their pages.  Were this still true, its editors would not have to say so.  The Times became the newspaper of record not because of its boasts, but because of its excellent reporting.

Those days are gone.  The Times has now become a partisan rag.  Its biases are so profound and ubiquitous that any but the most enthusiastic liberals can see these without trying.  The Times hates Trump and all he stands for.  Indeed, its leadership has detested conservatives for generations.

What is different today is that the paper seeks to lead a coup.  It is in the forefront of libeling our new president and his minions.  There is no balance on its pages.  Editorializing against Trump occurs in almost every story about him and his administration.

Fifty years ago journalists helped drive Richard Nixon from office.  Those remain storied days in the newsroom.  Recounting that historic victory gives even novice reporters hope that they too can exercise authentic political power.  Since most are liberals, they believe this would elevate them to heroic status.

The editors of the Washington Post harbor similar aspirations.  They have recently changed their masthead so that it includes the phrase “democracy dies in darkness.”  Apparently they believe that their own reporting provides the sunshine needed to disinfect a corrupt government.

This might be possible were these folks not themselves corrupt.  If they were the neutral watchdogs they claim, they could help keep the politicians honest.  Unfortunately, when they distort what one side does, while ignoring the machinations of the other, they are complicit in supporting demagoguery.

Shining a light in only one direction does not dispel darkness.  I am reminded of the joke about the man who searched for his lost pocket change under a street lamp, not because he dropped it there, but because the light was brighter.  The point is, we often see only what we are looking for.

Nor have the major television networks refrained from tendentious reporting.  They too have joined in the effort to dislodge a despised chief executive.  With nearly ninety percent of their coverage of the Trump administration negative, they are scarcely balanced in their approach.

When I was in junior high school, we were given civics lessons.  The goal was to teach us how to participate in a democratic society.  Presumably if we knew what was going on, we would make better decisions about public policy.

The same goes for a free press.  If it is honest and fair, it can promote rational and even-handed politics.  But if it is not, it does the opposite.  Propaganda is propaganda whether the government or private companies control it.  Incomplete and distorted stories always encourage shoddy thinking and dangerous dogmas.

Once journalists sought to be professionals.  They wanted to be respected for their integrity and diligence.  No more!  Now they want to be crusaders who rescue ordinary Americans from their ignorance and greed.

This ambition might make a positive contribution if these folks were honest and balanced.  Yet too many are not.  In their self-satisfied preconceptions, they smugly hide the truth while promulgating lies.  If they believe that this will reform our society, they are badly mistaken.

Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D.

Professor of Sociology

Kennesaw State University