Opinion: Journalists must give light; public can find its way


I was wrong.

Years ago, people used to ask me what journalists should do to combat the nation’s drift toward “factish” and “truthy” logic. What was needed, I’d reply with misplaced confidence, is robust fact-checking. If news media were more aggressive in calling people out for lying, I predicted, they’d be less likely to do so with impunity.

Well, in the years since I prescribed that remedy, Snopes and PolitiFact have come of age, and newspapers and TV news outlets have beefed up their fact-checking operations. Indeed, fact-checking has become a minor industry.

And it hasn’t helped.

To the contrary, politicians and partisans are more likely than ever to cry “Fake news!” whenever truth hurts their feelings or facts puncture their fantasies. And if fact-checking has become a minor industry, so has conspiracy theorizing, as bizarre fantasies about pizza parlor child molestation rings, “hoax” shootings and the so-called “deep state” infest our political discourse, making some people famous and others, stupid.

So when a journalist asked that same question last week, I demurred. All we can do, I said, is our jobs.

That being the case, Steven Spielberg’s latest movie arrives not a minute too soon, providing as it does a timely reminder of just what that job entails. “The Post,” which went into wide release Friday, is a tour de force about the 1971 standoff between The Washington Post and the federal government over publication of The Pentagon Papers, top-secret documents proving the government lied as it led the nation deeper into the fatal quagmire of Vietnam.

The decision by Post publisher and neophyte businesswoman Katharine Graham to put her newspaper and, conceivably, her freedom, at risk by going up against the Nixon White House is rightly regarded as a feminist coming of age. But it is also a journalistic watershed. In battling Nixon all the way to the Supreme Court with everything at stake, the Post embodied the sheer guts it sometimes takes simply to report the truth.

Of course, 1971 was a long time ago, a point Spielberg makes by lingering lovingly on typewriters, rotary dials, linotype machines and other artifacts of the pre-digital newsroom. We see people gazing enraptured at their newspapers the way they do their smartphones today.

It is a not-subtle reminder that things were different then. Yet, the movie also offers a rousing, timely reminder that for all that’s changed, one thing cannot: journalism’s mission must always be to hold power accountable.

So yes, all we can do is our jobs.

Frankly, I was initially dissatisfied with that answer. I was disappointed I wasn’t able to offer some innovative strategy to turn back the tide of factishness and truthiness. Then it occurred to me: That’s not journalism’s responsibility.

No, our responsibility is to provide information, not to enforce the proper use thereof. I’m reminded of the old adage about leading horses to water. I’m also reminded of the motto of the Scripps company, which started life as a newspaper publisher: “Give light, and the people will find their own way.”

We in journalism have, I submit, fulfilled our part of that bargain, doggedly if imperfectly. The question that will define the future is whether “the people” will fulfill theirs or whether they will choose to believe, as too many too often do, that partisan resentments justify factual apostasy. That’s something they must decide. It’s not journalists’ call to make.

In 2018, as it was in 1971, our job is to find the courage to report the truth.

It’s up to the people to find the courage to hear it.

Writes for The Miami Herald



Reader Comments ...


Next Up in Opinion

Opinion: Official portraits test our feelings about the Obama era

Well, what did you think? What sounded to me like the Gasp Heard ’Round the World followed the unveilings of the official portraits of former President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington. Or, as my own immediate, largely unschooled and low-brow reaction sounded, “Ooooh … ahhhh...
Opinion: Will automation kill our jobs?

A recent article in The Guardian dons the foreboding title “Robots will destroy our jobs — and we’re not ready for it.” The article claims, “For every job created by robotic automation, several more will be eliminated entirely. … This disruption will have a devastating impact on our workforce.” According to...
Opinion: If nationalism is on rise, where’s outrage over Russia?

I’m confused. These days, “nationalism” is all the rage on the right. I put it in quotes because there are a lot of different ideas of what nationalism means. Some of it is just rah-rah “USA No. 1” sloganeering. For others, nationalism is basically code for white identity politics. And for the so-called “alt-right...
COMMENTARY: Think we’re divided today? Remember 1968

Everybody talks about the current political climate in the United States, how the opposing political views are so divisive, and how the fire and fury will tear our nation apart. Certainly, those are valid concerns. But then I look back at 1968. The music proclaimed that it was all about long beautiful hair and the Age of Aquarius. But the planets were...
Opinion: Mass killers should be denied notoriety they crave

An orgy of mutual disgust now greets every mass shooting in America. Liberals despise conservatives who, they predict, will offer only insipid “thoughts and prayers” in the face of what they conceive to be preventable massacres. Conservatives scorn liberals who, they believe, will propose “feel-good” gun measures that would...
More Stories