Skip to main content

Press Culpability

One of the largely untold stories of this era has been the culpability of the mainstream press in our current predicament. For at least two decades, the press has turned a blind eye to the insidious Republican takeover of all the levers of power, consistently treating this long descent into lawlessness and lunacy as if it’s all just politics as usual.

What the press has refused to say out loud — in any mainstream media format — is that one of our two major political parties has gone completely off the rails, and is systematically corroding every social, economic, and political structure in its path. You will never hear it said on the air that yes, this mess is entirely the work of one party.

Which it is. It couldn’t be more obvious. It’s certainly well documented. In our hearts, we all know it. You would think it might be worth a mention among the pundits we’re so devoted to hearing from.

But the core pretense — that we’re a nation of upright citizens, soberly discussing the issues of the day in a fair and equitable manner — is being disingenuously broadcast by people we trust to know better.

But because the business model for today’s press requires conflict, and because a conflict demands two sides, and because two sides need — for the sake of “narrative thrust” — to be seen as equally plausible, we hear incessantly how “both sides are to blame.”

The term “both-siderism” (a/k/a “both-sidesism,” a/k/a “false equivalency”) has entered the language for good reason. What it lacks in linguistic elegance it makes up for in utility. It’s a handy term for something that — once you recognize the phenomenon — pops up everywhere you look, in most of what passes for discourse these days.

Both-siderism takes many forms, but the template is well defined: minimize the methodical destruction wrought by Republicans, while exaggerating the most trivial missteps of Democrats.

Play down Trump’s immigrant-bashing. Play up Hillary’s emails. Play down voter suppression, assault on the rule of law, criminal incompetence in a pandemic. Play up Biden’s latest gaffe.

And treat them as equally bad.

In much of our media — NYT, WaPo, CNN, MSNBC, and other outlets that aspire to journalism (Fox News doesn’t count) — both-siderism seems to be a fixture of editorial policy.

But wait, you say, I see criticism of Republicans all the time. Yes, you do. But you will never see a Republican pundit called out for lying, no matter how outrageous the whopper. And you will never, ever see a prominent “news” personality call out the Republican party for undermining our entire way of life. They would be off the air in a heartbeat. Even Rachel Maddow — who regularly shows us Republican carnage in real time, and who comes as close as anyone to placing the blame squarely where it belongs — does not cross that line. One can only conclude that she is forbidden to do so.

The effect of this is to permanently tilt the playing field. Because no matter what Republicans do — no matter how naked the power grab, how venal the corruption, how open the cruelty, how bald-faced the lie — we can absolutely count on the press to give them a pass.

Oh, they’ll make disapproving noises. They’ll roll out a pundit, or a news anchor, or an op-ed columnist, or a whole panel of serious-sounding analysts who get paid to be indignant. Inevitably they will wring their hands and lament, with a straight face, how our discourse is always so partisan, and isn’t it such a shame we’re so divided?

And that’s the lie the press is selling. That the country is divided, as opposed to vandalized.

In the name of fairness, they want us to accept that ignorance should carry equal weight in any discussion. That science is subjective. That facts are negotiable. That rule of law is optional. That scoundrels deserve our attention.

These are not things that should be up for discussion. They make a mockery of the values we supposedly share as a nation. Yet we’re told by the press every day that these things have two sides, and that both sides deserve to be heard.

That is simply not true.

Which brings us to the real two sides of the discussion. A discussion we are not, repeat not, having. To our deep detriment.

Because for any issue that’s truly important — for the urgent needs of healthcare, infrastructure, environment, and anything else we’ve ignored for way too long — there are indeed two sides. But only one of them is acting in good faith.

Republicans have shut down all debate. You won’t hear either side of those issues, consequential as they are, discussed anywhere. Since they have no ideas, only an agenda, Republicans know they can’t win any honest discussion. So they refuse to discuss. They deal exclusively in alternative facts. They gaslight in broad daylight. And the press plays right along, pretending it’s nothing.

If you want Republicans on your panel, you have to make believe that they have a valid point. No matter what lie they tell. 

So the big story here is that the people who are supposed to be telling us this big story happen to also be its subjects. So who exactly will tell it? The press?

You see the problem.

 

P.S. For much of the thinking behind this rant, I am indebted to Driftglass and Bluegal, the husband-and-wife podcasting team at The Professional Left. For many years now, they have pointed me to difficult truths with good humor, and with equal parts insight and gusto. I encourage you to sample their wares.

Comments

  1. Thanks for turning me on to Driftglass & Bluegal. I subscribed.

    I object to the extreme generalization about Republicans. I hope that there are still many rank-and-file Republicans of good will, and note that on the national stage, the country still has a handful of influential Republicans of conscience.
    One example is the old conservative blue blood George Will: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/no-one-should-want-four-more-years-of-this-taste-of-ashes/2020/06/01/1a80ecf4-a425-11ea-bb20-ebf0921f3bbd_story.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Republicans of conscience are nowhere in evidence in either house of Congress, nor in most statehouses. As for the George Will and the other Never Trumpers, their complicity in getting us to this point predates Trump by decades.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

France and Britain Just Gave the Finger to Fascism

There is now ample evidence that people with democratic systems of government actually like them, and would just as soon keep them, flaws and all. There seems to be a strong backlash occurring in several European countries, a trend toward shoring up democracies threatened by toxic authoritarian forces. In Poland last year, then in France and Britain last week, actual voters — as opposed to deeply compromised opinion polls — gave a big middle finger to the fascists in their midst. I don’t pretend to understand the electoral systems of these countries — let alone their political currents — but I’m struck by the apparent connections between different elections in different countries, and what they might be saying to us. I’ve spoken before of Poland , where ten years of vicious minority rule was overturned at the ballot box. A ban on abortion was the galvanizing issue — sound familiar? — and it brought an overwhelming number of voters to the polls, many for the fir

Are America’s B.S. Detectors Finally Getting an Upgrade?

  Can a person acquire an immunity to propaganda? I’ve been wondering. It was Julia Ioffe who got me started. She wrote last week of the dwindling effectiveness of the Russian disinformation industry. She reports that the bot-farms that caused all the mischief in 2016 are now a shadow of their former selves. Ever since their founder and leader, Evgeny Prigozhin , was blown out of the sky last year, they’ve come under the control of Putin’s office, which means poor performance is now institutionalized. This can be seen in the messaging being disseminated by these so-called influence campaigns, which is almost comically inept. The content is focused exclusively on undermining support for Ukraine, a subject that couldn’t be less relevant to most Americans. Anyone who actually cares about Ukraine will just laugh at the fumbling English and feeble logic of the posts they’re seeing. But what really got me thinking was Ioffe’s assertion that these campaigns are old

Democrats, Step Away from the Ledge

  Anxiety comes easily to Democrats. We’re highly practiced at perceiving a crisis, wanting to fix it immediately, and being consistently frustrated when we can’t. Democrats understand consequences, which is why we always have plenty to worry about. Republicans don’t give a rat’s ass about consequences — which is, let’s face it, their superpower. I wasn’t intending to write about last Thursday’s debate, mostly because I post on Tuesdays, and this could be old news by the time it gets to you. But then the New York Times weighed in with a wildly disingenuous editorial calling for Joe Biden to drop out of the race, and the rest of the mainstream media piled on. In the Times' not-so-humble opinion, Biden needs to consider “the good of the country,” something their own paper has repeatedly failed to do for almost a decade. And since this is now the crisis du jour for virtually every Democrat who watched that shitshow, I thought I might at l