Since media literacy is what it is — not among this abnormally engaged and astute audience, obviously, but generally in society — I thought I’d put together a compendium of “laws” of the industry that make it what it is.
If anyone ever made the brave and possibly mistaken decision to put me in charge of a “Journalism 101” course, these are the lessons I’d share, learned in five years in the game.
Journalism Law I: Everybody — everybody — has biases
That includes sources.
That includes subjects.
That includes journalists.
That includes me.
The bias is in the choice of facts to report and facts not to report in a nearly limitless field of options, especially on highly complex issues. It’s in every unspoken word. It’s in the pattern in which facts are presented and the conclusions they suggest.
Related: MSNBC News Actress Confronted Over Migrant Coverage, Bodyguard Assaults Journalist
Obviously, I believe I’m right about my perspectives, or else I wouldn’t have them.
But to deny that I have biases when interpreting and presenting the news would be wrong.
Two ways to neutralize those biases to the maximum extent possible in the service of arriving at the truth:
- Acknowledge that bias exists and is pervasive
- For journalists, never lie about or consciously distort facts to serve those biases
- When faced with others’ biases — politicians’, sources’, other journalists’, etc. — the maxim “consider the source” always applies
Journalism Law II: Groupthink is a hell of a drug
Every organization, media or otherwise, fosters an ideological culture.
In media groups, that ideological culture develops among the management, the editors, the news writers/anchors, and even within the audience, which naturally coalesces based on ideological affinity.
Via Psychology Today (emphasis added):
Groupthink is a phenomenon that occurs when a group of well-intentioned people makes irrational or non-optimal decisions spurred by the urge to conform or the belief that dissent is impossible. The problematic or premature consensus that is characteristic of groupthink may be fueled by a particular agenda—or it may be due to group members valuing harmony and coherence above critical thought…
In a situation that can be characterized as groupthink, individuals tend to refrain from expressing doubts and judgments or disagreeing with the consensus. In the interest of making a decision that furthers their group cause, members may also ignore ethical or moral consequences.
Evolutionary psychology posits that groupthink is the byproduct of the necessity of group cohesion for survival among highly interdependent humans — cooperation equals thriving, entropy equals death.
Bucking the orthodoxy, which often comes with harsh social sanctions — sometimes explicit, but often implied — is undeniably the path of greater resistance than submission to the hive mind. So most group members will never even attempt it. Others will dip their toes in the water to see what happens and abort mission when they encounter pushback. The bravest ones stick to their guns and either succeed in changing the paradigm — like, for example, Trump did in 2015/16 in which he shattered the GOP Old Guard — or die trying, as it were.
Related: Elite Media Propagandist Cries at Davos: ‘We Owned the News’
I use the term “groupthink” as a quick and easy way to refer to a mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members’ strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action. “Groupthink” is a term of the same order as the words in the newspeak vocabulary George Orwell presents in his dismaying 1984 — a vocabulary with terms such as “doublethink” and “crimethink.” By putting groupthink with those Orwellian words, I realize that groupthink takes on an invidious connotation. The invidiousness is intentional: Groupthink refers to a deterioration of mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgment that results from in-group pressure.
—Irving Janis
As a general rule, the more effort an organization puts into maintaining narrative dominance by freezing out alternative viewpoints, the flimsier its tenets are (see: COVID and the legacy media). Rather than a sign of strength, groupthink, although it might be a convenient tool in the short term, is a major liability in the long run.
Truth stands up to scrutiny and therefore isn’t vulnerable to it; lies depend on coercion and darkness to thrive.
Wherever the journalist spots extreme gatekeeping, enforced conformity of thought and secrecy, in any context, it’s a good bet there’s some filth under that rock that makes it worth kicking over.
Rule III: ‘All I know is that I know nothing’
The willingness to take in new information and perspectives and adapt your worldview accordingly is a noble attribute — one that requires some degree of humility.
With the plan to follow up with a second edition of “Laws of Journalism,” I’ll nick this line from Socrates for the time being and go out with a bang: “All I know is that I know nothing.”
… Pt. II coming soon.
