Many years ago, I was appointed to be the news director of the small-town radio station where I worked as a board operator. I didn’t get the job because of merit and didn’t even want it. It was a battlefield promotion. The previous news director had quit after a disagreement, and the GM just happened to be walking by the booth where I was minding my own business, segueing commercials for “The Dr. Laura Show.” He looked in and said, “Hey, you can be the new news director!” And so, despite my protests, I was. Most small-market news products at the time consisted of reading the community calendar notes, a few PSAs, and some lost dog announcements. Somewhat quixotically, I decided I would raise the bar.
I took to the streets, reporter’s notebook in hand, and met the mayors, city council members and managers, county commissioners, department heads, cops, school superintendents, and anyone else who might be a news source. I did more than go to public meetings. I visited officials in offices, kept an eye on state and local issues that could impact the community, did plenty of deep dives, and even made one foray into investigative journalism. No, I did not have a news chopper, a million-dollar budget, or a $60 haircut, but pound-for-pound, I could have stacked my product up against any of the Salt Lake TV or radio stations. It was a more-than-full-time job, but I felt like we were making a difference. When I quit, I was replaced by a very sweet, nice, well-meaning soccer mom. It did not take long before the news went back to community calendar notes, a few PSAs, and some lost dog announcements. Oh well.
A few years ago, I got a text from her asking for a phone call. We moved away in 2014, so it was a bit of a surprise. What she wanted was advice on how to improve the news product. I asked her how she was getting her news stories. She made a few phone calls, sent some emails, and re-wrote PSAs. I told her she would need to hit the pavement, meet the players, and build a reputation. That was not feasible, she said, because people didn’t want to talk, and they just put everything on social media. Granted, social media was not a factor when I was a reporter, but I told her if she wanted to stand out, she had to do the legwork and requisite brand-building. She had to develop trust with her news contacts, and that wouldn’t happen with an email that happened to feature call letters in the signature line.
In 2023, I wrote a deep-dive piece for PJ Media about a drag queen story hour slated for that town’s library. There was a noticeable furor over it, and many citizens were outraged. The leadership of Uintah County, sufficiently unnerved by the potential backlash, decided to let the event take place. Out of curiosity, I checked the station’s website to see how it covered the event. As I recall, there was not much to the piece. It didn’t condone or condemn the event but mentioned that it happened in such a way as not to anger anyone or, more to the point, catch any flack from the event’s hosts. Which, to a degree, is understandable. But it was a hot-button issue for the community, and there was a bigger story to be told. The station opted to punt instead of digging deeper. There is, after all, safety in not ruffling any feathers.
When I was still news director, I got my share of threats and demands for retractions. Our county commission once passed a controversial measure. As I was writing the story, my GM stuck his head in my office and asked if the story would make the commissioners look bad. I explained that it was not our job to make local politicians look good; it was our job to report what they did. The news should be neutral, but there is a difference between neutral and neutered. Journalists should report the truth, even if the truth does not favor the side they prefer. Especially then.
Of course, there is more to massaging the news than not ticking off half your audience and keeping the ad dollars coming. The larger your sphere of influence, the more powerful the people to whom you must answer. Coupled with that is the danger of members of the media believing that they are obligated not to report the truth but to create the truth. We watched that kind of hubris on full display with the Hunter Laptop Story and, moreover, Trump’s “fine people” remark. They want to remake the news in their own images. That may come from misplaced fealty to a government or party and can also be the product of sheer ego. So Margaret Brennan’s Sunday performance should come as no surprise.
Writing over at UnHerd, Wolfgang Munchau notes that the EU was not ready for JD Vance, who was unwilling to play by the house rules. Here are some excerpts:
Having been relegated to the kids’ table of international diplomacy, the Europeans hoped for some soothing words from the Americans at the Munich Security Conference. Instead, they got a scolding from J.D. Vance, the US Vice President. He told them that the biggest threat to the West is not Russia or China but the suppression of free speech in Europe. You might think this is an odd issue to raise at a conference about security, but for Vance, the two issues are linked.
The Vice President cited a number of outrageous cases of state censorship, the most extreme of which was the cancellation of Romania’s presidential election last year after the wrong candidate won. The decision was widely applauded in the EU, which I also see as an alarming sign of how censorship has been normalised in modern Europe. The argument for cancellation was Russian interference. Someone, apparently, had lied on TikTok.
What sustains the EU is not a democratic mandate but the mainstream media, academia, and think tanks — a blob of organisations that together exert indirect control over what gets discussed and published. You will not find editorials in German newspapers in support of the Alternative for Germany (AfD), despite the fact that this party now accounts for approximately 20% of popular support. The new Right-wing parties communicate through social media instead. This is why the EU is so focused on content moderation for social media, and it’s why we have seen a recent explosion of fact-checking units in broadcasting companies and media organisations.
But the Left is rarely subjected to such fact-checking. Quite a few members of the blob have abandoned X for the alternative Bluesky, which resembles the old Twitter. There, on a much smaller scale, the old echo chamber still works. There, users describe the Trump presidency as a coup d’état, and still think that Ukraine is winning the war. No one interrupts them — or checks any facts.
The Germans believe they are champions of free speech, but in reality, they are among the worst offenders. The only censorship I myself have ever experienced was from a well-known German news magazine.
Brennan and her cohorts, both in the U.S. and across the globe, have an obligation to serve the blob Munchau mentions. It is a symbiotic relationship. They serve the blob, and in turn, the blob makes them the gatekeepers of information. And there is a genuine belief that all things conservative are fascistic. Of course, these people also genuinely believe that killing a child in the womb or postpartum is a “reproductive choice.” They also believe that sexualizing children is “love,” and any objections to the contrary are genocidal. They will gladly harass or, in some countries, arrest anyone who objects to their views. But that harassment and those arrests are justified by the people responsible for them. They aren’t Nazis, after all. Just ask them.
— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) February 17, 2025
Commensurate with that set of problems is the fact that many in the public refuse to acknowledge that things have come to a festering head in their home countries and abroad. For some, the daily revelations are too much to bear. Those revelations are harbingers that the world may not continue as it has for so many years and that chaos is much closer than some would like to think. Many still want to hope that all this shall one day pass and it will be back to business as usual. However, “business as usual” is how we got here. I’d like to think our company will make millions of dollars and that in five years, we will be retired in the Caribbean, where I will drink Red Stripes or rum, smoke cigars, and fish off the piers every day. And I will never give the headlines the slightest glance. That’s the reality I want. I have to live in the reality I have.
The opponents of Elon Musk do not have as many supporters as the blob would like us to think. But the supporters they do have cannot and will not come to terms with the notion that their leaders have been selling them out for decades. These people pledged their love and undying loyalty to the progressive movement. They are not able to cope with the fact their unfaithful lover hasn’t just been surfing porn behind their backs; he has been swiping right on Tinder and frequenting red-light districts. That’s not the reality they want.
The EU, CBS, the Democrat Party, and all their fellow travelers are striving to maintain the reality they want, even if it is pure fiction. Leaders and journalists, in particular, should never indulge in that sin, and if they do, they deserve every guilt-ridden, sleepless night they have coming to them. The doctrine of “Misinformation for the Greater Good” always ends horribly and is, incidentally, a favorite tool of totalitarians. Margaret Brennan should take note, as should we.
