It may seem obvious that the media would defend itself against the never ending stream of criticism hurled in its direction. It may feel painfully trite for us student journalists to defend our profession with fervor, but we will anyway, because it’s important to us and important for you, too.
We, in “the media,” received the message: you don’t like us and you don’t trust us. A Gallup poll earlier this month found that Americans’ trust and confidence in the mass media “to report the news fully, accurately and fairly” has fallen to its lowest level in polling history, with a mere 32 percent reporting they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. Less than 15 percent of republicans trust the “liberal media.”
Articles such as “How to Avoid Picking Up Prejudice from the Media” in the Huffington Post reinforce the notion that media exists to push a single agenda and dupe the American public.
As student journalists, we don’t mind leveling with you. Sometimes members of the media lob softball questions at presidential candidates. Headlines can sometimes be overly click-bait material. Editorialization occurs more frequently than it should.
But not all media is made the same, and categorizing all outlets with one term (uttered in a derogatory tone) prevents you from the quality reporting is fighting for recognition in the vast depths of the internet.
The Fordham Ram is frequently under similar scrutiny not to yield to a particular narrative and represent all sides of an issue, even if one side is more vocal than another. As a student publication, we have certain advantages that national and local media do not. We are not vying for clicks to fund our publication. Therefore, we do not need to tailor our content to “viral” content. While we want to serve the interests of our readers, we take pride in our mission to serve as a journal of record.
Professional publications do not have that luxury. They must publish native advertising to supplement declining print sales and pay their reporters. They cannot afford to fund extensive investigative pieces as frequently as they used to. The internet has both proliferated knowledge to an unimaginable extent and destroyed the business model of traditional news, a transition that “the media” are still clumsily recovering from and adapting to.
Social media has not assisted our industry in our attempts to convey an image of neutrality. News reporters have twitter pages with sizable followings, allowing journalists to interject their opinions in situations where their opinions traditionally would not be heard.
Readers are often unaware of the role they play in the news cycle. Editors produce more content that readers click on in an attempt to salvage revenue and maintain a reader base. Some have argued that this process has exacerbated the political crisis within our country.
It takes two to engage in that argument, and two to feed into that system.
We ask that you stop and think before decrying “the biased media” with an angry fist. This vague term includes thousands of publications and networks, each with their own, unique form of news. With millions of unique people with unique goals involved in the daily process of producing media content, how can one’s opinion boil down to not trusting the entirety of “the media?”
Regaining the respect of a highly critical audience will be nearly an impossible task, but one that journalists must take seriously if they value their professions. Readers turning their backs on news has a dangerous prospect.
Despite our obstacles, it is still our job to sift through the rhetoric and rumor in the rubble and expose the truth.
