The media is failing us

It took a week longer than I anticipated, but let's write about media failure!

A good jumping off point is a reference I made in the last post to a quote from CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky. Shortly after I posted, there was an update:

https://www.foxnews.com/media/abc-news-edited-out-cdc-directors-answer-vaccine-confusion

The update is not particularly exonerating. The extra 20 seconds gives a more specific context to the answer, and shows that the word "encouraging" was initially used by the interviewer. It does not change the overly easy dismissal of death in people with comorbidities, that in turn works with a tendency to dismiss others too easily as having brought trouble on themselves. The disability community still has a right to be angry.

That is an issue that could take several posts. I believe we will get back to that and the effects of capitalism on government policy. For now I want to focus on media.

That particular edit was probably made for time, and not malicious. It should have been thought about more, perhaps, but a CDC director who was thinking about the value of disabled lives and so on would have fielded it differently. 

It is ironic that I am using an article on Fox News, because that is often where the misinformation with malice aforethought comes in. Allow me to refer you to this Washington Post piece from Dana Milbank:

 https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/01/21/fox-news-lie-school-board-domestic-terrorists/

Fox News, with lots of repetition, has taken a a reference to potential domestic terrorism at school board meetings (which given some of the things that were happening at school board meetings, was completely appropriate) and has tried to conflate it with the Biden administration considering all parents speaking out as domestic terrorists.

Sadly, as ridiculous as this is, there is a subset of the population with whom it works. 

It is not unreasonable to question how it works. For example, in this quote by Matt Walsh, “I’m glad that the Biden administration labeled us domestic terrorists, because that was a wake-up moment for a lot of parents."

I doubt that Matt Walsh really believes it, but I am sure that many of his listeners do.

Of course there is the question of the level of their belief: do they actually understand that some actions are crossing lines -- not just of courtesy and civility, but actually of legality -- or are they so sure that it is justified that they don't think of that? That part probably varies depending on the person.

(A good determining question may be whether in your mind you equate the prosecution of people who broke into the Capitol, where they assaulted law enforcement and stole and defaced government property -- including with their own feces -- with a general persecution of conservatives.)

Are there people who hear the lie, do not do any additional research, and do not know that if they were to contact Fox News to try and get specific examples that back up the lie, Fox would not and in fact could not provide any examples? Absolutely.

That may be an example of us failing... not the media, but ourselves.

There is so much to explore, but I want to give two more examples of what happens and how it happens.

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1466768909252575241

This is a tweet from Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) comparing two tweets from AP White House reporter Zeke Miller.

From February 2nd, 2018: "US added strong 200K jobs in January"

From December 3rd, 2021: "US employers added a sluggish 210,000 jobs as economy contends with inflation and shortages."

Rupar goes on to add that those time periods are with nearly identical unemployment rates. Certainly, context could be added about what kind of jobs and wages, but that sounds like a slant that was overly favorable toward Trump, or overly harsh on Biden. 

For all of the claims of a liberal media bias, Trump was not reported on responsibly. There has been a shift in the other direction under his successor. Is that because of a perception that this will be better received by readers, and get better hits and ratings and advertising? And is that perception overly focused on white male consumers of media? 

Perhaps, but corporate influence and ownership plays a role, as well as the increasing difficulty of being able to survive as a journalist without already coming from money. In addition, the Trump administration was likely to shut out reporters they didn't like, where that is less likely to be an issue with an administration with any sense of ethics.

We may not have much ability to influence what is reported and how. That is all the more reason to be aware of how those decisions are influenced.

If all goes well, I will try and write more about news consumption next week. For now, just for some more idea, here is some analysis on one thing that is being reported, which background on how that came about from Civil Rights Corp director Alec Karakatsanis (@equalityAlec).

https://twitter.com/equalityAlec/status/1484966529531879425

It is worth pondering.