Journalistic Malpractice

Years ago, when I was working as a reporter for the Hudson Dispatch, I participated in a newsroom conversation.  One of the more senior journalists was pontificating on the state of New Jersey politics.  Although I was new, I realized that a lot of what he said was grounded in his personal biases.

Much to my surprise, when I read the paper’s lead story the next day, it was essentially a rehash of the previous afternoon’s bull session.  What had seemed to me nothing more than disheveled speculation was presented as if it were incontrovertible truth.

Once upon a time, journalism was supposed to be about conveying the facts.  Reporters were expected to be neutral observers who transmitted information without distorting it.  Although I realize that this was an ideal, there was nevertheless an effort to respect it.

Today, however, editorializing on the front page has become business as usual.  Although I was taken aback by what I read in the Dispatch, contemporary reporters routinely take disguised partisanship in stride.  If anything, they long to be so well established that they too can palm off opinion as fact.

Who nowadays doubts the prevalence of a liberal perspective in the media?  Who doubts the pervasive bias of reporters when they write stories about presidential candidates?  Everyone knows that unfairness abounds.  It is crystal clear that Hillary Clinton benefits from relatively gentle treatment.

Some journalists have actually broken the unspoken ban on admitting this.  Instead of the conventional denials, they acknowledge slanting their coverage.  They justify this, however, in the name of protecting the nation from disaster.

Liberal journalists are sure that a Trump presidency would be catastrophic.  Having become reporters in order to promote progressive causes, this prospect cries out for intervention.  They must, in good conscience, save the American people from making a dreadful mistake.

Why do journalists feel this way?  Why do they assume that progressive policies are always in our best interest?  The answer is that they are often just as ignorant as that senior reporter back in New Jersey.  They too do the equivalent of putting their shoes up on the desk and BS-ing ad nauseum.

People frequently confuse the authoritative tone of correspondents and commentators with knowledge.  If these talking heads sound like they know what they are saying, it is assumed that they do. 

The plain fact is that this is not always the case.  Sometimes the mask slips.  It is remarkable how often reporters who appear on the television show Jeopardy reveal a lack of in-depth comprehension.  And why not?  Schools of journalism do not teach history or politics.  Their concern is with communication and manipulation.

Hence we get this spectacle of journalists clacking over absurd misinterpretations of what Donald Trump says.  They are happy, for instance, to pretend that he called for the assassination of Hillary Clinton, rather than do even-handed analyses of her economic policies.

Journalistic malpractice abounds because so many journalists are unreconstructed idealists.  They have no clue about how the economy works or the way that social change occurs.  In their naiveté, they are therefore prone to exaggeration and misrepresentation.

Let me make it clear that there are exceptions.  Some reporters remain conscientious.  Still, the trend toward knee-jerk partisanship is unambiguous.  Not that long ago, reporters aspired to doing investigative pieces.  They wanted to break through the curtain of political deception.

Today they are part of the institutionalized dishonesty of the contemporary scene.  This is a shame because it does not have to be that way.  Journalists could uphold ethical standards.  Although some do, too many don’t.

As a result, the public is becoming jaded.  Ordinary Americans know they are being stage-managed.  Unfortunately, millions are willing to credit the validity of stories that feed their prejudices.  They do not object to nonsense as long as it is nonsense to which they subscribe.

In other words, journalistic malpractice is a social phenomenon.  It flourishes not merely because of the foibles of reporters, but because ordinary folks serve as its enablers.

Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D.

Professor of Sociology

Kennesaw State University