11/18/2016

Election reveals big challenges for all Ohio journalists

By Dennis Hetzel, Executive Director

I feel a need to write about the election campaign, the challenge that Ohio journalists face going forward and what ONA can do to help.

None of this will be easy.

It won’t be easy, because too many national media outlets are complicit in the erosion of standards and basic news judgment. The public perceives this, and it makes life harder for the hundreds of Ohio journalists who continue to seek multiple sources and confirmation before they report news, check their facts and provide deeper reporting despite the most challenging times for our industry in our lives.

It won’t be easy, because facts no longer seem to matter to large swaths of citizens. Most of these citizens certainly are not deplorable.  But some – on both left and right – deserve your derision.  I am speaking of smart people whose lack of interest in exercising any intellectual rigor before they “speak or share” – particularly on social media -- is indeed deplorable.

For example, I have a Facebook friend who is a sharp lawyer and seasoned political observer with hundreds of followers. He’s what author Malcolm Gladwell would call a “connector” and an “influencer.”  He has credibility with those who agree with his views, and he often offers ideas that prompt fresh thinking for those who don’t.  But he’d rather be a bomb thrower, sharing links from crap websites or stories that wouldn’t survive the most cursory application of journalistic standards.  Leadership should carry moral and ethical responsibilities.

As I used to point out when I led discussions on reporting and media ethics, facts are the foundational elements of journalism. Truth is more elusive. People can and should debate what “truths” are revealed by facts.  So, what happens when millions of citizens decide that their opinions and conclusions matter more than whether there are facts to back it up? What happens when there is no agreement about basic facts? It’s hugely destructive to journalism – and our country.

I try to stay out of Facebook frays, but on a few occasions I have pointed out to someone that the news they were sharing simply wasn’t factually accurate, and I would cite Snopes.com or PolitiFact.com. The response would be something like this: “PolitiFact has a liberal bias, so I don’t pay attention to them.”

There are actually two thoughts there. So, let’s separate them.

Whether PolitiFact has a liberal bias is not a fact. It’s an opinion.  Their ratings such as “mainly true” and “pants on fire” also are opinions. I happen to agree with this criticism, at least in some cases. However, PolitiFact and Snopes also do this: They tell you the facts used to arrive at their opinion – their “truth” if you will – and they provide reputable sources of those facts. You can dismiss the rating; you shouldn’t dismiss facts.

Remember the “two-source rule” to confirm a story? On Wednesday, the “Today Show” played a tape that purported to be – and probably was -- Trump advisor Steve Bannon speaking. Matt Lauer opened the segment by saying NBC hadn’t confirmed it and didn’t know for sure if it was Bannon. But they played it anyway. This is so common now that presenting unconfirmed material has become an accepted practice. This puts the credibility of “traditional media” in the same bucket with those who push garbage.

The election also exposed huge problems created by the networks’ addiction to polling stories versus time and resources that could be used for real reporting. James Warren, who writes the daily media column at Poynter.org, posted this item:

"In the early 2000s, when I was the editor in Keene (New Hampshire) and local voters were besieged by pollsters, we were able to document how people got fed up with polling calls," says Tom Kearney, now executive editor of The Stowe Reporter, Waterbury Record and News & Citizen of Morrisville, Vermont. “ 'Got three of them this morning,' a man told us. “Told ‘em all something different.' “

Says Kearney, "I know of no other 'science' that hinges entirely on people telling the absolute truth to strangers. I can’t believe how poll reports have absolutely taken over campaign reporting. And now we have the November surprise."

We can’t expect these things to change. There should be no illusions about the priorities of the national broadcast and cable outlets versus the time some of us remember when news was seen as a national trust first with profits to follow at the networks.

Consider these comments by Les Moonves, the chairman of CBS, in February, talking about the Donald Trump phenomenon in this excerpt from Politico.com:

"It may not be good for America, but it's damn good for CBS," Moonves said at the Morgan Stanley Technology, Media & Telecom Conference in San Francisco...

"Most of the ads are not about issues. They're sort of like the debates," Moonves said, noting, "[t]here's a lot of money in the marketplace."

"… Man, who would have expected the ride we're all having right now? ... The money's rolling in and this is fun," Moonves went on. "I've never seen anything like this, and this going to be a very good year for us. Sorry. It's a terrible thing to say. But, bring it on, Donald. Keep going.”

Some weeks later, Moonves tried to walk back these comments, but the damage is done. His attitude gives comfort and ammunition to those who question whether “freedom of the press” still belongs in the First Amendment.

Despite these discouraging trends, you can be proud that there was outstanding, smart journalism done across Ohio in this election by ONA members from the largest to the smallest.   

I hesitate to single anyone out, but I must mention the Akron Beacon Journal and their managing editor, Doug Oplinger. The ABJ led an effort to build a statewide consortium of print and broadcast journalists to pool scarce resources and offer deep, meaningful coverage of the issues that mattered most to Ohioans. Doug notes that the group also learned a lot about why we are either hated or, perhaps worse, marginalized in many minds to the point of irrelevance. ONA was proud to play a modest role in bringing the group together and providing the technical support for content-sharing. It was a good start. We hope it’s a platform for future development.

Still, it’s an immense challenge for good work locally to overcome louder noise. How can our newspapers and local websites distinguish themselves in this environment to be the trusted, credible places for news in our communities?  How can we be game-changers and still guard the timeless, important standards of quality journalism?

ONA pledges to do all we can to help through our legal hotline, our training and conferences and our lobbying efforts on First Amendment and sunshine law issues – or any other way you might suggest. Buckle up for the ride.