Breaking the News

Before the news breaks us...

Two institutions in particular have an extraordinary impact on society: education and the media (including social media). Education should teach us how to think, while the media, for better or worse, tells us what to think. 

In 1995, I had one of the best professional experiences of my life working as researcher for James Fallows on his incredible book, Breaking the News: How the Media Undermines Democracy. 

Breaking the News explains how the media suffers from its tendency to reduce complex issues to soundbites, important debates to horse races and substantive differences to screaming (not talking) heads. He explains how the public’s inability to receive objective reporting and clear, concise analysis of the day’s events prevents it from making informed and intelligent decisions. Instead, we hear, “Candidate X said 2+2=4, but Candidate Y responded that it is 5. Candidate Y’s supporters strongly agree.” 

It’s clear to me that the birth of Fox “News” and right-wing conspiracy paranoia radio like Rush Limbaugh were among the first cancerous cells to “break” the news in our modern society. (Though this is is no new phenomenon. “I’ll write under a pseudonym, you’ll see what I can do to him…”) Fox and their looney, right-wing friends confuse people by conflating opinion and even fantasy with fact. They spread delusional, fictional fairy tales about wicked Democrats trying to steal the country.

This is bad and deserves a lot of thought, especially as we see Fox spreading the lie that left-wing Antifa are actually to blame for Wednesday’s insurrection. (Is anyone else confused by Representative Mo Brooks claiming it was “Fascist Antifa”? Fascist Anti-Fascists? Surely he needs to be expelled).

But I want to point out a far more subtle and frustrating tendency in mainstream media - unconscious bias. You saw it all the time in 2016. The media probably thought they were hounding Trump and yet research showed Trump’s coverage significantly outperformed Clinton’s.

One journalist who really irritates me is Jon Sopel, North America editor for the BBC. I’ve been on a five-year, one-woman crusade against him. 

It started during the last campaign for the presidency. Sopel did a lot of hand wringing and reporting on (oh my and glory be) “HER EMAILS!” 

Yet for each of Trump’s atrocities, there always seemed to be in implication there was another side to the story. A possibility Trump didn’t really mean it or it might not be true. Sopel was always ready to make false equivalence between what Trump did and some terrible scandal of Clinton’s (oh ya, it was always “HER EMAILS”!). 

And when something happened that was incontrovertibly bad (the good people on both sides in Charlottesville), Sopel always bought into Trump’s belated attempts to clean up his mistakes. He was always ready to convey that, at last, the president was becoming presidential. 

Now, I make no comment on what kind of person Jon Sopel is and I have no idea his motivation for his coverage. But sometimes it borders on the ridiculous, as though he wilfully misunderstands what kind of human being Trump is. 

This is how the Trump “apology” was covered this morning:

Simon Jack:

In a marked change of tone, President Trump has expressed his outrage at what he called the heinous attack on the Capitol building in Washington, DC. Speaking in a video message released on Twitter after a brief ban from the site, he called for calm to be restored. He also said he was focusing on a handover of power to the new administration, widely seen as the first public acknowledgement of his defeat in November’s election. Senior Democrats are demanding his removal from office while leading Republicans are distancing themselves from him. Last night, the education secretary Betsy DeVos became the second member of his Cabinet to resign in the aftermath of the storming of Congress. Here’s our North America editor, Jon Sopel.

Jon Sopel:

This is a dizzying, whiplash-inducing U-turn from the president. The video condemns the behaviour of the rioters but only the day before, he’d urged his supporters to march on the Congress. After they had stormed the Capitol, he said he loved them and they were very special people. Last night, he was outraged by their lawlessness. They defiled the seat of American democracy, he said.[Sopel doesn’t say Trump “said” he was outraged. He says, “he was outraged.” It’s a subtle, but important distinction.] On Wednesday, he insisted there had been massive fraud in the election and the result must be overturned. Last night, no mention of that. 

(quote from Trump sounding like a small child repeating by rote an apology to their sibling for smacking them on the head… again…) 

A message of unity that stands in stark contrast to what the president has been preaching during and since the election. To his supporters, he says this, “I know you’re disappointed, but I also want you to know that our incredible journey is just beginning.” Perhaps a hint that he intends to run again. 

But what’s brought this remarkable change? Maybe Donald Trump had just decided that it was the right thing to do. Or perhaps the threat of being forcibly removed from office weighed on his decision. 

Yes, it’s possible that Sopel is using British subtle snarkiness to be sarcastic… And if he had not sounded like a quiet Trump supporter since 2015, I might buy that. But intentionally or not, a listener could walk away from this report thinking maybe Trump had had a Grinch-like change of heart. 

Saying “perhaps the threat of being forcibly removed from office weighed on his decision” is not the same as saying the likely more accurate assessment, “perhaps it was merely a cynical attempt to convince his Cabinet not to invoke the 25th Amendment.”

In any event, anyone who has paid even a tiny bit of attention since the birther days (and likely before) would know by his mechanical delivery and strict adherence to the prepared remarks that the only words Trump meant were, “And to all of my wonderful supporters, I know you are disappointed, but I also want you to know that our incredible journey is only just beginning.”

The only thing this proved is that the man can read, at least a little (“Yo-se-Mite”).

Sopel, there has been NO remarkable change. No change at all. Stop giving credence to the notion there may have been. People might believe you.

I know the BBC can’t do this, but the best, most accurate and honest way to handle it is like Stephen Colbert, “So I’m not going to show you a word of his video because he doesn't mean a word of it.”  End of.

That’s why I depend upon the late night comics to assess and contextualize the daily news. At least they are honest - and when they aren’t, they are upfront about it.

Going back to what I said in my Souls post, I hate that Sopel has reported this way for five years and I can do nothing about it. I’ve complained. I’ve sent examples. Maybe I’ll send him an annotated copy of Jim’s book.   

Oh, to have a voice. 

But at least I won’t have to listen to these kinds of pieces about Trump anymore… Roll on Inauguration!! (What a shame the pathetic little man doesn’t have big boy pants he can wear for the day. Hope Nicola Sturgeon refuses him entry to Scotland, since he’s likely to ignore her request to stay away. Remember, Nicola, he’s a super-spreader!)