The Media Needs To Look Inside When It Comes To The “Fake
News” Slur
“Fake News”.
You know, I am sick and tired of hearing that slur be
uttered by people, especially from our orange-skinned narcissist in the White
House.
To be clear: there is no such thing as “fake news”. It does not exist. It is a made-up term. It’s like having a “vegan Angus cheeseburger”
with a glass of “organic MSG-free evaporated water” while sitting in the second-story
of a single-story house.
There is news. There
is truth. There is opinion. There are facts. There is fluff. There is fiction. There is propaganda. There are lies, slander, and libel. There is no such thing as “fake news”.
If it is not truthful, if it is made-up, then it is not
“news”. It is either fiction or opinion
or propaganda or an outright lie.
This column that I’ve been writing longer than either MSNBC
or Fox News was ever in existence is not a “news” column. It is commentary. It is opinion. I make no pretense that this is anything
other than my view on things as I see it.
That is the very definition of an “opinion” article.
What “fake news” truly is, is anything that Donald Trump and
his red-hat-fascistic Trumpets do not like or agree with. They would go so far as to call this very
opinion column “fake news”, simply because it calls out Trump and Trumpets for
what they really are. “Fake news” is
nothing more than a slur slung at the media, like a racial slur or an ethnic
slur or a gender slur being uttered by an alt-wrong fascist. It’s like when I refer to politicians as
“paid whores”, or referring to a lawyer as a “shyster”. “Fake News” is the media’s form of the “N-word”
or the “B-word” or even the “C-word”. And,
no, I won’t say “those words” specifically because they are *that* offensive to
some people.
The problem, of course, is that in the Cult of Trump, one
cannot accurately inform the public of anything truthful when it is immediately
declared “fake news” not only by the narcissist in the White House, but also by
millions of red-hat-wearing cult followers who would rather surround themselves
by lies than listen to one piece of honest truth that goes against their own
delusions.
And I hear you, members of the media. I really do.
I know you don’t like being called “fake news”! I know you don’t like having your credibility
ruined by some narcissist. I’ve been
there. Really. I know what it’s like to have your
credibility struck down by some claim of “fake news”, or, as it was referred to
in my time, “false facts”. It hurts.
Unfortunately, there is nothing that you can do about it
that would sway those red-hat cultists.
Accept the fact that they are lost to you and to the world. They would rather cling to their lies and delusions
than to risk being told that they could be wrong about anything.
The real problem, of course, is losing even more readers or
viewers because of that viral slur. When
other people start believing that you’re “fake news”, it’s really hard to get
them back. And I know that your
employers are all about the profit and all about the ratings and readership,
and that local media is really a slowly-dying medium. I get it.
You need to make money too, and this stuff hurts your bottom line. You’re scared about whether or not you’ll be
around next year. I don’t blame you.
So this is a great opportunity for you in the media to do
something about it. I know some of the
TV stations are making promises to do better, or to “be different”, but this
really needs to be concerning journalism in general, and it needs to be more
than just an advertising gimmick. And
this can’t just be for those “in the trenches”.
This also has to include the editors and directors and producers and
publishers and even the owners of the media.
You all need to take the time and actually demonstrate your honesty and
sincerity. This needs to be a systemic
sea change from the top-down to prove your sincerity.
Here are some needed suggestions on how to do that.
Stop using the slur “Fake
News”! I can’t stress that
enough. Like I said before, it is a
made-up term. It’s like “confeve”. Don’t give it credibility by using it like it
is a real term. Don’t say “fake news”
when referring to fraudulent stories or propaganda or outright lies. Call them for what they are. If it’s fiction, call it fiction. If they are fraudulent, call them
fraudulent. If they are lies, call them
lies. If it is propaganda, call it
propaganda. The red-hats won’t hate you
any more or less than they do already, but your viewers or readers or listeners
will respect you more for calling it for what it is instead of using “soft
language” or the slur that actually hurts you more than it does your enemies.
Stop covering not-news
stories in your news! Once upon a
time, there were editors and producers that actually knew the difference
between news and not-news. Did they stop
teaching that in journalism school?
So a
financial advisor predicts that Amazon will soon buy big-box Target. Operative word is “predicts”. Is Amazon actually buying Target? Has Amazon put in a bit? Made a proposal? Did any kind of preliminary research that
would lead one to believe that they would buy Target? No?
Then it is not a story! Period!
See how that works?
Ditto with all of those stupid asinine medical “reports”
that are not fact-checked or means-tested.
Today, coffee is “bad” according to one study published in a magazine,
but in the next week or the next month, it’ll be “good” again by a different
study in that same publication. Wine
will be “bad”, and then “good”, and then “bad” again for all sorts of different
reasons. And then, no matter the
product, no matter the spin, they will always give the caveat.... “always take
in moderation”. Having a study published
in a magazine does not make it true. How
about we abstain from stupid “studies” and “reports” like that unless they can
be duplicated and means-tested? Why
can’t we take that in “moderation”? Or,
better yet, how about you wholly abstain from the junk not-news?
Lady Gaga is not news. Neither are the Kardashian Clan, Beyoncé,
Demi Lovato, Taylor Swift, the British Royal Family (unless you’re in the United Kingdom), and which celebrity-of-the-moment
is getting married and/or divorcing and/or having a baby. The less we hear about them, the more we can
hear about the real things that have an actual effect on our lives. I would rather hear more about the traffic
than wasting air time about someone that I will never really know having a baby
or getting married.
End the Polls! No more polling! At all!
End it! We do not need to know
what some poll says about how we “should” feel about any issue or any
politician or any wannabe-contender to some position. We certainly do not need to know how we
“should” feel today versus how we supposedly “felt” last week or last month or
last year. The red-hats won’t care, and
it really should not affect the rest of us at all. Human minds change on a subject or a person
over time. That’s not because of some
poll. That is because of other factors
in the real world.
We found out the hard way back in the 2016 Farce that polls
mean nothing. If “the polls” were really
accurate, then Hillary Clinton would be president. But she’s not, and a certain orange-skinned
narcissist with a habit of calling you “fake news” is.
But even before then, there were plenty of instances here in
Georgia where local polls predicted a “political upset” or even a “toss-up” in
state and local elections that ended up being just plain wrong.
Polls are not reliable.
They can be easily manipulated by the people running the polls.
Take the hint, media execs and producers and publishers, and
end your love affair with polls!
Speaking of which...
Means-Test Your
So-Called “Experts”! And, yes, I’m
talking about your so-called “political consultants”, but the same can pretty
much apply to all your other “experts” and “consultants”. If your meteorologist was giving the wrong
forecast, predicting rain when it doesn’t and sun when it snows, would you keep
that person employed? If your anchorman
or anchorwoman was constantly not reading from the teleprompter or constantly
getting the teleprompter wrong, would you keep them there? No?
Then why continue to employ a so-called “political consultant” that
can’t get his or her predictions right when it comes to politics?
I’ll break it down for you so that even a Trump supporter
would understand it: if your “expert” predicts an election to be “to the wire”,
and it ends up not being that... then your “expert” is wrong! If your “expert” predicts one candidate to
win and they don’t, then your “expert” is wrong! If your “expert” predicts a certain legislation
will pass easily and it doesn’t, then your “expert” is wrong!
So why the hell are you still employing that failure? That person has proven to be unreliable. You need to terminate their association with
you.
And yet, you folks in the media are not doing that. The same people that predicted failure when
there wasn’t, that predicted a close call at the ballot box when there isn’t,
and predicts legislative passage that fails, is not only not fired, but they’re
also not repentant on being proven wrong.
Why should they? It’s just a game
to them. That sorely needs to end. Let them be wrong in whatever think tank or
academic institution that would tolerate them as long as it isn’t in front of your
broadcast or print headline.
Understand that their failure erodes your credibility, just
like it would for a meteorologist who can’t forecast the weather, or an anchor
that rambles on like an idiot.
You know what else erodes your credibility? Retaining your “political consultant” when
they’re also sending out talking point memos to party members. That’s a pretty blatant conflict of interest. It’s one thing to have some college professor
spouting ideology, but to have an active political consultant using your medium
as their message board, that turns your station or publication into a political
advertisement. You forfeit any kind of
perception of impartiality when you do that.
You literally give people the idea that your publication or your station
is biased.
And finally... this last part is hard, but it needs to be
done from the top-down...
Re-Invest in the
truth! Let’s get brutally honest
here... the greatest weapons you have against the slur of “fake news” are
honesty, integrity, and, most importantly, the truth. And that needs to be paramount in your
publication or production from the top-down.
Your stories need to be honest and true, not just eye-catching. If you screw up, if something is wrong, own
up to it with the same emphasis as you placed with the original story. If your story is on page one and you find out
later that something’s wrong on it, don’t bury the correction five weeks later
on page nineteen next to the church bulletins.
If you don’t want to print a retraction or correction on Page 1, then
you better make sure that the story in question is true without a shred of
doubt!
Understand that every story that ends up being false, to be
misleading, that ends up having information that is not true, that erodes your
credibility in the public. You reinforce
the slur of “fake news” every time that happens. And it’s not just your publication or your TV
network or TV station or radio station that gets affected. Ultimately they all do. They all have an affect on how people
perceive your little part of the media.
Remember Dan Rather’s downfall from CBS News? For all of his decades of reporting the news,
it all fell because of his adherence to a story that ended up being not true. Stephen Glass seriously damaged The New Republic magazine when it came
out that he made up a lot of his stories and then set up his own “verification”
to sell the lie. Rolling Stone lost their credibility in 2015 following the
realization that their story on a campus rape in November of 2014 was
fictional. Every single one of these
scandals, and many others, helped give birth to the slur “fake news”, which tars
all publications and all productions with the same brush. And those don’t go away either. They stay and they are remembered and recited
when your credibility is questioned.
There are two diverging views on the role of the media. Either they are considered independent observers
and honest chroniclers of activities, or else they are seen as political propagandists
and for-profit marketers. If you in the
media want to be seen as the former and not as the latter, then it is entirely
up to you. How you use that medium plays
a key part in defining how the rest of us sees you.
Don’t like the slur of “fake news”? Only you in the media can truly put an end to
it.
No comments:
Post a Comment