How NPR lost the public's trust

[Belsnickel]

(04-09-2024, 05:26 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I knew you'd be the first, and possibly only, person to respond to this.  What concerns me about this story, and its confirmation of what many of us already knew is that I think the steady decay of journalistic standards is a far greater threat to our democracy than Trump, as it, if not fixed, will far outlive him.  As I've said previously, Trump initially had some points in regard to the media, but most of his claims were baseless and/or hyperbolic.  Now I fear the opposite is closer to the truth.  Maybe this gentleman having the courage to come forward is a sign that this is changing, but journalism as an ethical profession has really taken a beating and public trust of it is probably at record lows.  Without a fourth estate grounded in principles of accuracy, fairness and, at least some degree of impartiality I fear that the opportunities for misinformation to become the norm will grow exponentially.

I would think those constantly beating the drum of Russian propaganda would be in full agreement here.  Maybe the threat is too subtle for many to see it?

I forget which podcast I was listening to, but it was a very interesting self-reflection in journalism during and post-Trump. It may have been on an episode of the aforementioned 1A. They talked about one of the problems being not knowing how to cover Trump and being dismissive of him prior to his election. Then his attacks resulted in almost a vengeful position from the media in response and becoming very aggressive. This resulted in handling him with a little more kid gloves in some instances and swinging things too far in the other direction in some instances. Part of the issue is that any attempt to fact check him has been seen as an attack by him and his followers, leading to the confusion.

In addition to all of this you have the changing media landscape where the marketplace of ideas is flooded with information of all sorts and this makes more traditional media sources have far less of the market share than they once did. We don't have to rely on the airwaves or the newsstand for our information, it's all out there on the various sites. This changes the business model for these companies, including the non-profit ones. They are in a constant struggle for eyeballs and clicks that their old models weren't going to gain them. NPR's stereotypical programming isn't going to attract most Millennials and younger. The Associated Press doesn't present information in a way that stands out. Investigative reporting from anyone is just going to hold the attention of most people. As a result, these things we have relied on for so long are losing traction and when they try to modernize to compete they lose credibility with the masses.

Plus, as much as people like to claim they want unbiased news sources, the majority don't understand biases in media coverage and they often continue to rely on sources with those slants that they align with. If they do look at media they disagree with to claim they do, they essentially hate read it.

I have no idea how to fix it.