A recent article on Roadless (“99% of comments”) reminded me of one of the reasons I started NCFP (the predecessor of The Smokey Wire) was due to what I saw as reporting that was inaccurate. You can check out this piece where I discuss a New York Times article (in 2012). Whoops, I was still employed by the FS in a D Admin and questioning folks like the New York Times and Pew.. maybe not the brightest idea in terms of long-term employment.
My explanation for this (being a charitable soul) was that our issues were too complicated to make it into a newspaper-sized story. In reality, though, as time has gone on, it appears that many media outlets’ reporting was, in fact, biased. Various individuals I know were interviewed and then the interviews not used if they didn’t fit the pre-existing narrative. As we’ve seen recently, complex arrays of positions on different land management issues have been reduced to “environmentalists vs. the timber industry” for the Forest Service and “environmentalists vs. oil and gas” for BLM.
Sometimes “fits the narrative” and “sounds vaguely plausible” seem to be all that a story requires. But as more and more of those stories have been published on more and more topics, and those run against peoples’ knowledge and lived experience, much of the media has lost trust with the public. This is nothing new since the days of Aesop and the story of “the boy who cried wolf.”
For those of you who don’t follow this, there are two stories that show the larger perspective. First, the results of a recent Gallup poll.
Americans’ confidence in the mass media has edged down to a new low, with just 28% expressing a “great deal” or “fair amount” of trust in newspapers, television and radio to report the news fully, accurately and fairly. This is down from 31% last year and 40% five years ago.
Meanwhile, seven in 10 U.S. adults now say they have “not very much” confidence (36%) or “none at all” (34%).
Second is the news of Bari Weiss’s deal with Paramount and CBS News. I am a long-term subscriber to the Free Press and appreciate greatly the effort and vision, if not always the execution. Here’s Bari’s take on what the media universe:
The Free Press uncovered an America hiding in plain sight. People who want to be surprised. People who want to learn. People who are open to changing their minds in the face of new facts. People who believe that curiosity is a virtue and who crave common sense in a world that feels upside down. People who resist the warmth of political tribalism even as they seek community with one another. People who want logic and wit, not conspiracy theories and demoralization.
Most of all, Free Pressers are people who want to face the truth. Because we understand that knowing it is the only way to improve lives—our own and those of our fellow citizens.
If I could write better, it would be equally true of TSW.
If you want to look at some analysis of what went wrong, you could read Mir’s book on “post-journalism” or this piece by Martin Gurri. Or Uri Berliner’s (formerly of NPR) piece in The Free Press.
But those of us on the ground, as it were, don’t need talking or writing heads to tell us what we have observed.
But what to do about this opening towards a media focused on fair reporting? It seems to me that there are two things we can do (1) provide helpful suggestions to reporters and editors, by examining what is covered, what is not covered, how the story is told, who is interviewed and who is not interviewed, places where skepticism or questioning would be useful, and so on. I used to do that more during Colorado Roadless. Equally important is (2) finding and identifying stories that are fair enough to reflect and facts and attempt to understand the different points of view.
Because, after all, if we see our own countryfolk as “the enemy” and don’t try to understand them, it’s not a good path to be on, even if it makes more money for some media outlets and advertisers. Truth, compassion, listening to others.. we can and do try for all these things right here.