The century-long journalistic tradition of impartial, 'scientific' fact-gathering was allegedly dismantled by the baby boomer generation. Finding dry reporting dull, they championed an activist, narrative-driven style—seen in underground press coverage of Vietnam—which has since become the mainstream media's dominant mode.
Related Insights
According to Van Jones, cable news has pivoted from breaking news to manufacturing conflict. The primary goal is no longer live reporting but creating contentious segments designed to be clipped and go viral on social media, fundamentally changing the business.
By vowing to rely less on academics and experts, a news organization creates an excuse to platform misinformation and popular opinion over earned, fact-based knowledge, effectively replacing merit with trending topics.
The primary challenge for journalism today isn't its own decline, but the audience's evolution. People now consume media from many sources, often knowingly biased ones, piecing together their own version of reality. They've shifted from being passive information recipients to active curators of their own truth.
The nature of citizen journalism is evolving. Previously focused on passively capturing and observing events, a new wave of creators is actively pursuing investigations and deep dives. This shift is fueled by new monetization paths on platforms like YouTube and X, enabling a sustainable model for independent exposes.
Adam Carolla suggests that as newsrooms became majority-female, their culture shifted. He argues women are more emotionally inclined to "pick a side," leading to advocacy journalism instead of neutral reporting, much like a mother struggling to be an impartial umpire for her own son's game.
In a polarized media environment, audiences increasingly judge news as biased if it doesn't reflect their own opinions. This creates a fundamental challenge for public media outlets aiming for objectivity, as their down-the-middle approach can be cast as politically hostile by partisans who expect their views to be validated.
The ideal of impartial journalism emerged in the Victorian era as a deliberate break from narrative-led reporting. The Times of London’s coverage of the Crimean War, which truthfully exposed military incompetence rather than promoting a heroic narrative, serves as a key historical example of this new, 'scientific' approach.
Contrary to conventional wisdom, trading favorable coverage for access to powerful sources is no longer the best way to get a story. In the modern media landscape with diverse information channels, reporters find more impactful and truthful stories by maintaining independence and refusing to play the access game.
Public media organizations like the BBC and CBC face a fundamental dilemma. If they produce dry, impartial, fact-based content, they risk losing their audience to more engaging, narrative-driven competitors. But if they adopt narratives to attract viewers, they are immediately accused of bias, creating a no-win situation.
Pervasive media bias isn't an Orwellian, centrally-directed phenomenon. Instead, it's an emergent, herd-like behavior similar to a flock of birds moving in unison without a single leader, driven by a quasi-religious belief in shared narratives among a specific socioeconomic class of journalists.