The Decline of the Media

Hi folks, today we have David Gollob who served as CBC, BBC, and Mcleans Latin American correspondent as well as editor of the CBC’s national news to discuss “The Decline of the Media”. If you enjoy the article and podcast, please invite friends and contacts to subscribe! Cheers and all the best.

The Decline of the Media

"...The dumbing down of America is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30-second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance." Carl Sagan

This is today’s sad reality.

People are no longer being fed the news on most major cable television networks, but, instead, infotainment aimed at titillating rather than informing. Whatever brings in the highest dollar monopolizes the news. And whoever controls the flow of money calls the shots.

Who is to blame?

The cable news networks that create a universe of infotainment that attracts viewers who prefer the shouting and confrontation between “journalists” and “panelists” since a pure 24 hour a day news broadcast would likely not hook viewers who many of whom need a “reality TV” approach to the news to draw them in.

Political Influences and Media Bias

Governments that control state-owned media, like the BBC in the UK and the CBC in Canada, want their version of what is politically beneficial to be aired.

For example, for the past nine months, the BBC and CBC have been reluctant to call the Hamas attack of October 7th a terrorist act and Hamas a terrorist organization.

There have been many “in-depth” programs about Israel’s attacks on Gaza but none on the spread of radical Islamism across the world and the repeated threats by Islamist leaders and everyday Imams to murder Jews and Christians and impose sharia globally.

The goal has been to avoid alienating Muslim voters who represent important voting centers in Canada and the UK.

Bias in Political Coverage

Another issue that is being mismanaged by the media is the proof that Trump had a close relationship with the late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein and the existence of telephone recordings in which they discuss Trump’s raping of underage girls on Epstein’s private island and in his Manhattan home.

Sure, there may be instances where members of both parties engaged in crimes on Epstein’s turf and who want to keep this information out of the public eye.

But we are speaking about the Republican candidate for the presidency who just may win in November and yet the media is trying to quash this news from public scrutiny.

Public Perception and Misinformation

Pew Research has found that roughly half of U.S. adults (48%) now say the government should take steps to restrict false information, even if it means losing some freedom to access and publish content, according to the survey of 11,178 adults conducted July 26-Aug. 8, 2021. That is up from 39% in 2018.

At the same time, the share of adults who say freedom of information should be protected – even if it means some misinformation is published online – has decreased from 58% to 50%.

In Canada, 49% of those surveyed agreed that journalists and reporters are purposely trying to mislead people by saying things they know are false or gross exaggerations. Fifty-two percent agree that most news organizations are more concerned with supporting an ideology or political position than with informing the public. And fifty-two percent of Canadians agree the media is not doing well at being objective and non-partisan.

This is hardly reassuring in democracies where audiences no longer expect the media to report the objective truth.

The Role of Political Correctness

In addition, I would add that today’s obsession with political correctness comes at a high price – not being able to call things as they are for fear of offending someone. Shaping the facts to fit a narrative always results in misinformation.

Solutions and Challenges

Can something be done?

Barring some form of censorship, no.

Forcing programs to place a warning that “the following is a news program” or “the following is an opinion program” will not solve anything if those who select the news stories have their own bias and only select reports that reflect their ideology or interest and avoid others that don’t.

As well, who would define what is “news” and what are “views”? Also, who would monitor the monitors?

The Canadian government recently introduced legislation to monitor on-line media. The cost that the government associated with this proposal was some $200 million, with a bureacracy of over 200 people. Can the budget bear this, and would the taxpayer approve?

I doubt it, since in Canada the costs of public projects tend to increase exponentially as do the human resources required to service them.

Conclusions

It is going to be very difficult to monitor and control the news if voters don’t wish to submit to censorship, and the censors are beyond the control of others who could determine the censor’s neutrality.

Meanwhile, my articles are opinion pieces. You would be right to ask if you can in fact believe me!

Podcast: