I was doing a little channel surfing, and came across a C-Span show where Michel Martin, host of the NPR program "Tell Me More" was talking to a group of young people. She was making a point that more adults ought to pay attention to, something that's been bothering me ever since I saw an ad for Rush Limbaugh which referred to him as America's most trusted anchorman. There is an increasingly blurred line between journalism and punditry. In fact, as Michel Martin told those youngsters, shows like "The Daily Show" and "The Colbert Report" are treated by some as actual news programs.
This of course perplexes the hosts of both these programs, as that was never their intent. They're comedians, not journalists. But where does it end? Some have taken issue with MSNBC's decision to allow Keith Olberman to anchor their coverage of the political conventions. Olberman's regular show is full of opinion, and it's often a joy to watch. But does that make him an anchor? MSNBC isn't the only culprit here. Fox News seems to have deliberately blurred the line between news and opinion, with its newspeople often making no bones about where they stand on certain issues.
Yet what fascinated me about the discussion I saw on C-Span was my own situation. I was trained as a journalist, meaning I was to keep my own opinion out of the stories I covered. Back in the day, our politics could be discerned primarily by the stories we chose to cover, that is, stories the mainstream media ignored. Still, for the past quarter century, I've been paid to express my opinion, to inform, to analyze, and tell people where I stand. In other words, I'm a journalist and commentator. There are times I'm not comfortable with wearing both hats.
However, take a look at CNN's Lou Dobbs (full disclosure- I've been on his show). He began as a business reporter, and has morphed into something very different (and far more lucrative). And one supposes there's nothing wrong with that.
Or is there? Do you know the difference between a journalist and a commentator? Can one person do both?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
"...shows like "The Daily Show" and "The Colbert Report" are treated by some as actual news programs. This of course perplexes the hosts of both these programs."
What's to be perplexed about? Those two shows come a lot closer to actual news (the purpose of which is to tell the truth, after all), or at least put more of a balance in the choices for news media, than the GOP-bought-and-paid-for mainstream media. It's not just conservative hate radio and Fox "News" that the likes of Stewart, Colbert and Olbermann are up against. It's the bulk of the mainstream media, which all too often march in lockstep with GOP talking points - 99% of the time, outright lies or severe distortions - and pass them off as fact. There's a reason the term "low-information voter" came into play in recent years - many people still get what passes for news, which in most instances is really warmed-over opinion, from the haircuts who sit at the desks at the major networks and do nothing more than read the teleprompter. Really, any observant person who watches political news, at the very least for 10 minutes, can see how issues and facts are framed and spun until they are no longer recognizable as what they once were.
As to the fact that Stewart and Colbert are actually comedians by trade: as Shakespeare said, many a truth is told in jest. One can debate how lamentable it is that many people are turning to shows like The Daily Show and The Colbert Report in lieu of mainstream news, but the bottom line is that a certain segment of the population is starting to wake up because they know they're being lied to, and they're tired of it. The trend will continue, unless something on a major scale happens, such as the reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine, unlikely as that is.
Post a Comment