Mainstream Media

When I was a kid there were three commercial televisions networks, PBS, and an independent station or two. News came from a 30-minute local broadcast at 6:00pm and was followed immediately by a 30-minute network newscast. The daily paper was on our driveway every morning and was supplemented by “The Today Show”. Throughout the day AM radio would air news on the hour. That is the media with which I grew up, and not until Ted Turner’s Cable News Network did the idea of 24-hour news flowing into our living room become a possibility. This was quickly followed by the abbreviated version with “Headline News”. Ultimately, other entrepreneurs followed with “The Weather Channel”, “C-Span”, and areas of specific interest like financial news.

All of the above media suffer from their own problems, usually attributed to their delivery method. The 24-hour channels find themselves without enough information to fill the day so they turn to commentary. The daily newspaper is typically 24-48 hours behind events due to publishing and delivery methods. Lastly, the major networks conceive their stories in the morning and build a broadcast around a concept that is not reactive to change or daytime events.

Personally, I feel “news” means the presentation of information or events. Unfortunately, what many view as news is colored commentary or persuasive opinion. For example, “A man robbed a bank” would be objective news reporting. On the other hand, “A burly man from the low-income neighborhood robbed a bank” could paint an entirely different picture in your mind. The simple use of adjectives and commentary has flowed into the news and tainted the objectivity of reporting and the average person is historically ignorant to this manipulation by accepting formerly credible news outlets at face value.

I would assert all media is “mainstream.” With television, newspaper, radio, and the internet we can access any news source at anytime. Every day I read multiple international and domestic newspapers, wire services, watch network news broadcasts, and scour several newsfeeds. I see trends in news and who is, or is not, reporting events. At the same time I also filter the adjectives and objectively form my own opinions. The insinuation of a domestic conspiracy in reporting is obvious when reviewing live, objective newsfeeds from around the world. I am intrigued by the three major networks presenting the same stories, in the same order day after day. I also wonder how major papers like the “New York Times” and “Washington Post” can have nearly identical front pages and editorial comments.

I believe the “Legacy” media is failing to provide objective reporting to its audience. Worse, it is not necessarily what, or how, it is reported, but the failure to report. For example, the “New York Times” made a conscious decision to withhold a story during the presidential election of 2008 that most likely would have changed the outcome of candidate choices. Most recently, the legacy broadcasting networks, the “New York Times”, and the “Washington Post” failed to provide timely reporting of events leading up to the resignation of a government official. Once upon a time I believe these legacy information outlets prided themselves on getting “the scoop” but it appears that is no longer the case.

The term “Mainstream Media” implies an accusation or conspiracy to promote an agenda. Some object to this, but the pattern has emerged over decades. The new method of story absence, however, is a covert method to undermine the “mainstream” argument. Objectivity would allow me to form opinions and omission of news is more manipulative than colored commentary.