The media as a whole today is what we call “news pornography.” They are simply interested in the highest ratings driven by the crassest and quickest cheap thrill they can find. They hone in on “zingers” and personal insults traded between politicians instead of asking hard questions and digging deep into policy specifics that will actually matter to the lives of Americans. Moreover, most members of the press act like freshmen cheerleaders in front of the senior quarterback whenever they come into contact with their preferred political party. Ultimately, they are mere party propaganda organs.
There a few journalissts out there that try to engage in true journalism, but most do not. This lack of journalistic professionalism has real consequences, more than just the 2016 election, but that could be one of them.
Think all the way back to 2003, had the media actually done its job and done some investigative work and asked some real questions, maybe the drive to go to war in Iraq could have been more thoroughly scrutinized. However, the press chose to act as little ra — ra cheerleaders for the war, most of them wanting to play GI JOE and letting a nationalistic form of patriotism cloud their judgment.
And on foreign policy and matters of of national security, most continue to be unable or unwilling to ask deep questions, ensuring that Americans only see one narrative and continue to vote for leaders who repeat the same mistake over and over again.
In domestic affairs, the media has not asked any real questions or done any real reporting in any recent election cycle. Think back to the 2008 and 2012 elections. Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman, while not made for ratings, did try to discuss politics and the future of the nation as mature adults. How about John Kaisch or Jeb Bush in the 2016 election. Where they great and interesting? No, but they had more substance than the other candidates.Where did that get them? No where. It got them ignored, to the great detriment of the nation. If, as Ron Paul did in 2012 and Bernie Sanders did this cycle, a substantive candidate gains any traction, the press derides their bid as weak. The press doesn’t encourage them or help them get over the top. No, instead they give that candidate the little push down the mountain that prevents them from getting to the top, preferring to elevate the machine and the cheap celebrity so that they too may participate in the festivities and be part of the “Washington in crowd.”Now we are faced with the possibility that a potential madman takes office on one side and a political machine on the other that offers little in the way of substance or prior accomplishments.
Not only are current potentially substantive candidates sidelined and marginalized, but many more are dissuaded from ever participating. And who can blame them? What normal human being would subject himself to the circus that the press frames around politics? Very few. Only people with something wrong with them would do that, and they are our leaders and future leaders.
When the majority of our US press runs into trouble overseas, it is hard to feel much sympathy for them since in reality they act as mouthpieces for their government instead of neutral guardians of information and the liberty that comes with it. What right do they have to claim as a protected class of journalists? And at the rate they are going, if the press ever loses its freedom of speech at home, they will have largely themselves to blame for empowering fear over information.