Journalism Fights for its Life

In his important year-end post for his site PressThink, New York University journalism professor and critic Jay Rosen warned, "the world has changed and journalists are in the fight of their lives."   Rosen's point is that the way for journalism to earn trust has changed because users now have more choices and more control.  He then provides a thoughtful list of ways is which journalists can win trust through transparency. 

But how does one win the trust of everyone in the era of Trump, who now is a bully with the White House pulpit?  The president proudly claimed in an interview with the Fox Business Channel last October that he "started this whole fake news thing."  Of course, that is not true.  In fact, according to the Washington Post, "President Trump has made 1,950 false or misleading claims over 347 days."  

That the president frequently lies is not fake news, and it is not new news.  A Morning Consult/Political poll last December found that only 36% of those sampled thought the president is honest.  In fact, 51% of those polled believe he is dishonest, while 60% think he is reckless.   Yet his almost daily attacks against the press, mostly false or misleading, have staggered many members of the press.  

The First Amendment of the Constitution guarantees freedom of the press.  Freedom House reports that freedom of the press is in decline around the world, including here in the United States.  A record number of journalists have been imprisoned worldwide, including twenty-one on "fake news" charges.  Senator John McCain issued this warning to President Trump in December on Twitter, "@POTUS must understand his harmful rhetoric only empowers repressive regimes to jail reporters and silence the truth."  

Soon after his return to the White House, following a holiday break in Florida, the president launched another fusillade on Twitter against one of his favorite targets, The New York Times.  "The failing New York Times has a new publisher, A.G. Sulzberger.  Congratulations!  Here is a last chance for the Times to fulfill the vision of its Founder, Adolph Ochs, "to give the news impartially, without fear of FAVOR, regardless of party, sect, or interests involved," his first tweet read.  It continued on a second, "Get impartial journalists of a much higher standard, lose all your phony and non-existent "sources," and treat the President FAIRLY, so that the next time I (and the people) win, you won't have to write and apology to your readers for a job poorly done!"  

Clearly the president's claims of fake news and his attacks on news organizations are all a tactic.  If he was innocent of sin, if his White House was free of scandal, if his agenda was popular with the masses, he wouldn't have to protest too much.  But he doth protest an awful lot!  He loves to spin his own alternate reality and lash out at the press.  His communications' staff, assorted acolytes and members of Congress echo his attacks because it is in their own personal interest, and the mainstream media is an easy target.  Washington Post Executive Editor Marty Baron stoically observed last year, "We are not at war with the administration, we are at work."  

But for more news channels, more news sites online, and the growing amount of users who get their news from social media, opinion is now the currency of the realm.  An enormous amount of Americans get their information from sources they feel agree with their views, i.e., one's that are consistent with their core beliefs.  And some news outlets carefully craft their content to appeal to their likely viewers, and to advance a political agenda.  This has left America so politically divided it is hard for people from different regions or ideologies to agree on basic facts, let alone have an rational and calm discussion.  

More transparency is important, absolutely, but do Sean Hannity's 3.2 million viewers care if he is transparent?   Few of his viewers check around with different sources to get the other side of the argument.  And they don't care that Hannity regularly consults with President Trump, who is a big fan of his program.   Sure, Hannity is not a journalist, but he is on the Fox News Channel.  

The big question is at what point will Americans say enough is enough with the attacks on the press.  At what point will Americans be motivated enough to devote time to study all sides of the issues.  At what point will Americans take the time to be well informed before making decisions about elected officials, as our Founding Fathers had intended when they wrote the First Amendment.  The Fathers wanted to assure that America would not be ruled by a despot, rather that it would always be ruled by the people.  

The press is not perfect, but most major news organizations have a process to assure that all of the facts are fully vetted before they are published, and to assure fairness, impartiality, independence and accountability.  On the other hand, the administration, the Congress, and government agencies are not always transparent and accountable to the people.  That will only happen with a strong and vibrant press.  

Journalists may be in a fight for their lives, due to evolving business models and rapid changes in technology, but their survival is essential for the maintenance of this great democracy.  

Trump's Press Tirade

Donald Trump unleashed a series of angry attacks on the press, including personal insults directed at some reporters attending his news conference Tuesday.  He called an ABC News reporter "a sleaze" and at another point said, "I think the political press is among the most dishonest people I have ever met, I have to tell you."  Of course, Trump has benefitted from more that $2 billion in free media coverage, according to a New York Times report in March, and his 40 minute news conference was carried live on the cable news channels.  

Trump's harsh attack appeared to serve many purposes for him.  First, taking on the press makes him look strong to his supporters because it is so unpopular with Republicans.  Second, Trump intended to change the subject from legitimate press inquiries about his handling of the veterans' fundraiser into a story about the press' unfairness.  Trump also was attempting to draw attention away from growing questions about Trump University, which is the subject of an embarrassing federal lawsuit.

The issue that triggered Trump's diatribe was $6 million he and his campaign spokespersons had regularly said he had raised to help America's veterans.  Trump had cancelled his participation in a Fox News debate in January because he was mad with how the network was treating him, and instead held a rally to raise money for veterans.   At the fundraiser he announced that the event had raised $6 million, including $1 million from Donald Trump himself.

Some veterans organizations subsequently raised questions about how much money was pledged, and exactly where it was being donated.  Reporters began to follow up on the status of the money.  Last week The Washington Post published a story with the headline, "Four months after fundraiser, Trump says he gave $1 million to veterans group."  Today Trump provided details of how much money he said had been raised and to what veterans' organizations the funds had been distributed.  He also displayed a copy of the $1 million check he had written to a veterans organization just last week.

Trump campaigns on his success as a businessman, repeatedly saying he knows how to get things done, and that "I am a unifier."  But he has consistently shown he has thin skin when it comes to criticism, and his default tactic is to immediately attack his critics.  Most often his vitriolic retorts are in the form of personal insults rather than facts.

"The press should be ashamed of themselves," he said Tuesday, "You make me look very bad."  He singled out political reporters as "Unbelievably dishonest."  He sarcastically referred to a CNN reporter as "A real beauty."   In January, Trump took on Fox News anchor Megan Kelly after she asked some tough questions at a debate.  Trump tweeted, "I refuse to call Megyn Kelly a bimbo, because that would not be politically correct.  Instead I will only call her a lightweight reporter."  And at rallies Trump regularly points to the camera stand and calls the press "slime" and "disgusting" to the cheers of his followers.

Some observers have said that Trump does not understand that the role of a free press is to hold candidates accountable for their actions and what they say.   In Founding Father Thomas Jefferson's words, "The agitation it produces must be submitted to.  It is necessary to keep the waters pure."  But Trump knows exactly what he is doing, and he does not want to keep the waters pure, otherwise he would release his tax returns.  And so far his bullying has earned him the Republican Party's nomination for president.  A reporter asked Trump if Tuesday's press conference was an indication of what his White House press conferences would be like.  "It's going to be like this," Trump responded.
  

Memo to Donald J. Trump: your press tirades will not have chilling effect on the press.  Reporters will continue to ask you tough questions, along with all the other candidates, because it is their job. And the questions will only intensify in the months leading up to the election given the future of the country is at stake.   You and some of your supporters may think your press attacks are effective, but it is really a sign of weakness, and an indication you have a lot to hide.  

The truth will ultimately prevail.  Remember President Richard Nixon?   

The Professor

Hofstra University's "Newshub" with some students in Journalism 75

Journalism Professor

People often ask me how I like being a journalism professor. I always answer that it is great, especially because of the students.

During the fall 2012 term, I taught four courses at two universities. I am a full-time associate professor at Hofstra University, which is located in Hempstead, New York, a thirty minute drive from my Manhattan home. Their journalism school is part of the university's School of Communication. Hofstra has excellent facilities and a very strong radio and television program, along with a first rate public relations school. I teach three courses at Hofstra, including multimedia journalism, broadcast writing and something I call TV newscast.

This past Monday we aired our final newscast of the semester. Here I am pictured with my editorial team.

I am also an adjunct journalism professor at New York University, where I have taught for six years. The Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute is part of NYU's College of Arts and Sciences. They have wonderful facilities in the historic East Village, near the Cooper Union and Astor Place.

While I have taught basic television reporting, I now primarily teach video and television production. In the spring I teach graduate students Digital Newsroom, which creates a thirty minute newscast each week. In the fall, I teach undergraduates how to produce a newscast. In both cases the students at NYU not only function as journalists, they must also handle all of the technical positions as well.

Tonight my 2012 undergraduate class completed its final broadcast for the term. Here I am joined for a post broadcast picture by students and NYU's director of operations, Adrian Mihai.

Take a good look at both of these pictures. In particular focus on the students. They are the reason I love being a journalism professor.