A Cure For the Cynics

Marvin Kalb presents us with a story-like and engaging analysis of the factors that have contributed to the rise of the “New News”; namely,­­­­ technology and a disproportionate focus on profit. Kalb’s empirical evidence presents a depiction of the modern world of the fast-paced, corporatized, hollywoodized, money-making news media in a way that is hard to argue with. Kalb ends with a doom and gloom evaluation of our press: the age of a truth-seeking media that serves the American people is over. Woodward and Bernstein, and maybe Isikoff, were the last of the greats.

I disagree with Kalb’s assessment of the American press. It’s true we live in a world where new articles are published every hour; where news is a business just like BP or Coca Cola that must sell, sell, sell. While headlines become shorter, investigative journalists become fewer. The people don’t trust the politicians, nor do they trust the press as its cynicism ceases to temper our idealism, and now overtakes it. But does it have to be this way? I reject the notion that the press has inherent to it any responsibility (to the public or anyone else) outside of that which it defines for itself. However, the press has the great potential (and burden should it choose to bear it) to be a tool for democracy; one of the institutions that holds society and government accountable. I would argue that as a business, realizing its potential and thereby reaching its ultimate market value, should really be the primary goal of the press. “Objectivity” may be an unattainable ideal, and “truth” a difficult concept, but what is America if not unwaveringly idealistic? If the news media would try once more to be the watchdog, it may find that the public will be more than happy to consume its product.

Of course, it’s always nice to wax philosophical, to talk about what journalism should be or could be if it only had the will, but honestly, it means little if it cannot be put into practice. If it indeed cannot be put into practice, then Kalb’s damning assessment is correct. However, the very technological advances that have pushed, if not wholly caused, the press to become what it is today, could actually be used to resurrect the investigative journalism of old; to wake the Woodwards and Bernsteins that lie dormant. I call it: Compartmentalization. The idea that all journalism must be hard-hitting, investigative, and objective is a bit, well, ridiculous. We already acknowledge that there is hard-news and soft-news. There can also be serious journalism and less serious journalism. While the websites promote the latest scandals, the newspapers can do the real reporting. While Twitter and phone applications boast the shortest headlines and the most sensationalism, “The Wallstreet Journal” and “The New York Times” can provide us with the details. Instead of every single news medium trying to be both gossip and investigator, they should pick one and do it well. That is not to say they cannot engagein other types of news, but the idea is for the gap between what media says it is, and what it actually is, to decrease. Isn’t it just common sense, after all, that it is better to be great at one thing, than mediocre at several?

Kalb has provided us with what seems like a description of the cause and an accurate understanding of the diagnosis of the disease that plagues the American press, but he also condemned it to death. Unlike Kalb, I believe there is a cure that we should be working hard to find, and none more so than the press itself.