The Trump era forced a rushed period of reflection. The paper also created a standards department responsible for making sure the hundreds of pieces of journalism it publishes every day, in an increasing range of mediums, remain appropriately Timesian. After the Jayson Blair plagiarism scandal of the early aughts, it created a public-editor position to answer questions and critiques from readers, only to discard it in 2017, partly with the idea that Twitter could do the same job. …The Times has a fitful relationship to self-examination. Warning: Contains the four-letter f-word. Reeves Wiedeman, "Times Change", New York Magazine.I don't recommend the whole thing unless you're a masochist. It's a dreary read, especially as the writer seems so obtuse, but I've tried to excerpt what I think are the most revealing parts below.
The following very long article describes in depressing detail what Campbell is alluding to in the above article with respect to The New York Times. Their abdication may leave them besmirched. But the shameful exhibition of willful blindness may not end well for corporate media. …Ĭorporate media may well protect Biden long enough for the gaffe-prone 77-year-old to gain the presidency. She lasted less than a year before the position was dissolved and she was let go. As readers pay, they are prone to make clear their preferences, and the news report tilts to reflect their partisan expectations.Įvidence of the tilt was striking enough four years ago, when Liz Spayd, an advocate of even-handedness in reporting, was public editor at the New York Times. With the decline of advertising revenues, the business model has moved toward a digital-subscriber base. The model used to be largely advertising-based, which encouraged news organizations to seek wide audiences by offering what was passably impartial reporting. The inclination to shield Biden may partly stem from the shifting business model for corporate news organizations. Matt Taibbi, who is perhaps the most searching critic these days of contemporary American media and their failings, noted recently that the "least curious people in the country right now appear to be the credentialed news media, a situation normally unique to tinpot authoritarian societies." "We don't want to waste our time," she wrote, "… 1on stories that are just pure distractions." That's what National Public Radio claimed, in a remarkably obtuse statement by its public editor (or internal critic), Kelly McBride. Or to dismiss it as so much Russian disinformation.
…he response largely has been to shun and ignore. Not in American corporate media, where an overt partisanship has become not only acceptable but unmistakable.
… Running interference for a politician was considered more than a little unsavory.
A defining ethos of American journalism that emerged during the second half of the Twentieth Century emphasized even-handed treatment of the news and an avoidance of overt, blatant partisanship. This neglect by corporate media represents an abdication of fundamental journalistic values of detachment, and impartiality. Corporate media obviously recognize they cannot investigate and publish critical reporting―they cannot do searching journalism―about Biden so close to the November election without jeopardizing his candidacy and boosting Trump's chances of reelection. Their contempt for President Donald Trump runs deep. …uch of mainstream corporate news media is indulging in… consequential episode of misconduct that's defined not by overheated misreporting but by willful blindness on an extraordinary scale. Joseph Campbell, "The Shame of the Press", Media Myth Alert. Previous Month | RSS/XML | Current | Next Month WEBLOG November 30th, 2020 ( ) Shame, Shame, Shame
0 kommentar(er)
