Our media is good for SUGGESTIONS as to what MIGHT be news

glenn greenwald writes about a conversation he had with a senior vice president of abc news about its reporters' anonymously-sourced story on iran "more than tripl[ing] its ability to produce enriched uranium in the last three months" and therefore "Iran could have enough material for a nuclear bomb by 2009..."

[A]t least one key reason for that distrust is both clear and compelling. Many Americans who more or less did trust the judgment of the country's most respectable media outlets were severely betrayed, when they supported an invasion of a sovereign country based exclusively on patently false claims that were uncritically though aggressively disseminated by the American press. For that reason, distrust of the media has been substantially heightened, and that is so particularly when it comes to stories -- like the ABC News one here -- that bolster the Bush administration's warnings of a "grave threat" posed by whatever country happens to be The New Nazi Enemy of the Month.

I would speculate that most national journalists -- certainly the ones with whom I have interacted following media criticisms and/or observed responding to criticism of others -- simply do not recognize, acknowledge, or accept the level and intensity of distrust for what they report, particularly when their behavior appears similar to the government-boosting conduct that led us into Iraq. Most of them will acknowledge that there were isolated instances of gullible or even biased and corrupt reporting during the Bush presidency (call it The Judy Miller Concession), but they believe that none of that resulted in -- nor should it have resulted in -- any significant change in how their profession is perceived and in the level of mistrust which Americans have for what they report.

They still think that the phrase "ABC News" means that whatever follows will be presumed credible and reliable. But that just isn't the case any more. And that's why stories which rely exclusively on placing virtually blind faith in the judgment of such organizations are likely to be disregarded (except by those whose pre-existing political agenda is advanced by the story).

the "blind faith" credit score i currently assign to u.s. media is embarrassingly low... i look at them more as folks who have some SUGGESTIONS for what MIGHT be news, rather than as sources for what is ACTUALLY news... and i'm certainly not the only one... political and news blogs didn't just miraculously sprout like mushrooms after a hard rain... they're filling a serious need people have to attempt to figure out what's true and what isn't... there is a problem with that, though, and it's a problem i face every day... in order to satisfy myself that i'm coming within even a country mile of the so-called "truth," i have to triangulate with 6-7 sources to even begin to feel comfortable... that's a huge expenditure of time and energy, as i think we would all agree...

(thanks to atrios...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet