The Media vs. Journalism                       #194

By Hank Silverberg

We have heard much over the last few years about how the "media" is pushing its "agenda" on the American public. And much of that criticism has been targeted at news networks. So I thought as a retired journalist, who now tells you what he thinks rather than just reports the facts, I would put my two cents in on this topic.  

First, there is nothing in this for me. I don't make any money on this blog. I don't work for a news organization any more. I have nothing to gain by giving your my informed opinion.  But after practicing journalism for 40 years, it pains me to see the profession attacked because of a growing number of knuckleheads who don't know what the words "facts" and "truth" mean.   

We need to start by differentiating from "the media" and "journalism" because it's clear to me after numerous discussions in person and on social media, that many people don't separate the two, and they SHOULD. 

Hear is a dictionary definition of "media":

"The main means of mass communication (broadcasting, publishing, and the internet) regarded collectively."

The Media can circulate entertainment, sports, commentary or  news and information. And these days with "social media," anyone can do that. 

And now a dictionary definition of "journalism" according to Webster's:

 "Writing characterized by a direct presentation of facts or description of events without an attempt at interpretation."

Journalism is a profession. Anyone can do it with the proper training, but few people can practice it responsibly without that proper training.

Journalists, those who practice the profession, do not interpret the news or events, they report it. Sometimes they report it as it happens, when all the facts are not clear yet. Sometimes they report after it happens where there is time to think and evaluate and dig up additional facts that may radically change the focus and end result of a story.   

This may all look pretty obvious to you, but it is not obvious to many of today's politicians and pundits who don't understand what journalists do. 

The main job of a journalist is to function as a watchdog. Our Founding Fathers thought that concept was so important that they put it in the Bill of Rights as the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from suppressing it. 

Journalists watch over the government to make sure it is serving the public the way it was designed to, and that includes keeping a close eye on those elected to government office. 

They watch over industry to make sure profit- making companies are following the rules and not defrauding consumers or exploiting our natural resources at the expense of the public, both now and in the future. 

And they watch out for individuals who might be doing the same, legally or illegally. 

Their watchdog efforts also include reporting all of this to you, the public, in an accurate manner so that you can make informed decisions about your own life or lifestyle. 

Now, note the part of the definition above that some politicians and some people who work in the media have seemed to ignore of late: Journalists give----"direct presentation of facts or description of events without an attempt at interpretation."

That includes reporting when someone else, including the competition, does not do the right thing. 

Here is a good rule that most journalists are trained to follow: 

"If someone says it's raining and another person says its's dry, it's not your job to quote them both. Your job is to look out the window and find out which is true."  

There are a lot of people in so-called "news organizations" who aren't doing that. Please stop calling them journalists or reporters. If by chance they have actually been trained to practice journalism, then they are guilty of malpractice.  Instead, please start paying more attention to those in the media who are practicing real journalism. It will help you and your country. 

 

REAL REPORTING 

And speaking of real journalism, you may have missed this one. CNN gets a lot of criticism of late for some of its commentary. But this piece of investigative journalism can not be ignored or debunked. The cable network reported Sunday that millions of medical gloves imported into the United States from Asia are not new. They are used, dirty and in some cases, they are even blood-stained or have holes. 

We are talking about those blue medical grade gloves worn by doctors, dentists, nurses and many others in almost every health facility in the country that are supposed to be disposed of after one use.  

These gloves come from Thailand, Vietnam and possibly elsewhere. They are either counterfeit in terms of quality or USED. Criminal investigations are already underway both in Thailand and the U.S. Some importers say many of the gloves were detected at distribution facilities before they were sent to customers across the U.S. But many more got through.  

The fraud was promulgated by the high demand for sterile gloves during the pandemic, and one industry expert, Douglas Stein, told CNN that the nitrile gloves are the "most dangerous commodity on Earth right now." 

 CNN Investigation: Tens of Millions of Filthy, Used Medical Gloves Imported Into the US - CNN 

Powdered latex gloves are no longer used because of possible side effects. The nitrile gloves that are involved here are made of natural rubber and are produced almost entirely in east Asia. U.S. distributers, who say the prices and demand are extremely high, say they were not aware of the second-hand gloves until customers started to call and complain about blood stains and other dirt on what were supposed to be new gloves. 

Thai authorities are struggling to deal with the problem. According to the CNN report, the first raid of one company in Thailand last December found piles of garbage bags filled with loose gloves of different colors, materials and quality. They were being stuffed into new counterfeit brand boxes for shipment and resale elsewhere, including the United States . 

Virginia Governor's Race Close? 

All political eyes will be on Virginia over the next ten days or so. There's a heated race for governor between former Democratic Governor Terry McAuliffe and Republican Trumpite Glenn Youngkin. 

Both have some baggage, and the race is being watched closely as an indication of what voters are thinking as we head into the 2022 congressional races and yes, it's hard to believe, but also the 2024 presidential race. 

McAuliffe left office in 2018 with a modest 47% approval rating. He was required to leave by Virginia's one-of-a-kind law restricting governors from running for a second consecutive term. He's running again for another single term, based on his record. Republicans have attacked him as a radical liberal, even though he worked effectively with Republicans when he was Governor and has been cautious at embracing a fully progressive agenda. 

McAuliffe has run what appears to be a poor campaign, attacking Youngkin with full force but not doing a very good job highlighting his own record as Governor. He has brought in former President Obama to campaign for him, and President Biden is scheduled for a similar event.   

Youngkin has run his campaign standing on top of a fence. He has gladly taken the endorsement of former President Trump, even though Trump lost in  Virginia substantially in 2016 and 2020. Youngkin is trying to play it both ways by keeping Trump supporters in his column with a distinctively right-wing call to ban Critical Race Theory in schools, even though it's never been taught in Virginia. He has also continued talking about "election audits" and voter irregularities, even though there has been no fraud reported in the state. Youngkin has avoided any direct condemnation on the January 6th riot at the Capitol. But he is doing everything he can to lure in the well-off GOP supporters in voter-rich Northern Virginia's DC suburbs who abandoned Trump. Youngkin is using standard Republican mantras like lower taxes,  better schools and increased teacher pay, but never talks about how to pay for that. And that's one issue where the Democrats have failed to capitalize. 

The latest polls show  McAuliffe with a slight lead or a tie, depending on which poll you look at. 

 McAuliffe’s lead over Youngkin shrinks in governor’s race according to new poll numbers (whsv.com)

McAuliffe polled 49% compared to 45% for Youngkin in the lastest Wason Center poll at Christopher Newport University. But the poll indicated a significant 11% shift from McAuliffe to Youngkin among Independent voters. Other polls have shown the race a bit closer. A Monmouth University poll released in the last week has the race dead even at 46%. 

Polls show dead heat in Virginia's governor race (msn.com)

Here is a problem for Youngkin that McAuliffe's campaign has not really taken advantage of. The CNU poll indicates 61% of those questioned support laws that would protect a woman's right to choose, and 55% oppose laws similar to the "fetal heartbeat" ban in Texas.

Youngkin, publicly, has been on the fence. He describes himself as pro-life, but has indicated he would not have voted for the Texas law. He has been very unclear on how far he would restrict abortion rights, though he says publicly he will do so. 

The Virginia contest has also been the most expensive in history. By the time it's over, the candidates combined with other state offices like Attorney General and Lt. Governor, will have spent $100 million in 2021. 

Following the Funds: Va. governor’s race already most expensive in history, Dominion asks for money back after political donation | WAVY.com

McAuliffe, who spent much of his political career raising money for other Democrats, has taken in  over $44.5 million.  Youngkin has raised $42.3 million. Much of McAuliffe's money is coming from well-known Democratic donors, while Youngkin's major donor is himself. He has used $17.7 million of his own money. A good deal of the money on both sides is for campaign commercials, most of which have attacked the other guy instead of telling us where they really stand on any real issue.   

Early voting has been underway in Virginia for several weeks. 

Dumbest Quote of The week:

This week's dumbest quote comes from no other than the most uninformed pundit given a media platform anywhere in the United States. She makes Sarah Palin look like a genius.

It's none other than pundit Ann Coulter. She allegedly has a law degree, though I can't believe she even got through college with some of the ideas she spouts. Most of the time I think she probably doesn't really believe what she says, and makes the comments tongue-in-cheek to get a reaction. She makes her living being controversial.  

This week during a speaking engagement at Missouri State, she responded to a student's question with a bizarre answer. 

(Suffragettes protesting for the votes in 1921)  

The student asked her to confirm her comments from 2007 about  her often-stated belief that women should not have the right to vote. 

Here's what Coulter said this week:

"Yes, I'd give up my vote in a heartbeat as long as the rest of you stop voting.." referring to the rest of the women in the audience.

"Women see the government as their husbands. I mean, when you look at the Democrats getting in there and spending $4 trillion dollars...where ever women are given the vote in whatever state, in whatever country, you see spending going through the roof."

The comment, of course, is 100% sexist, implying that women know nothing about taxes, spending or monetary restraint. She doesn't know much about the real world. Coulter, by the way, has never been married, so she apparently doesn't know much about husbands either. 

   

(Your comments and suggestions are welcome)

(Copies of my latest book "The Campaign" can be purchased at the links below. Or you can buy a copy by emailing me at:

HankSilverberg@gmail.com
for instructions on how to get a copy 

at a reduced price and with a signature)

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B084Q7K6M5/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i0

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-campaign-hank-silverberg/1126429796