The problem with big media

Many on the Sunday shows were quick to laud the New York Times in their extensive expose of one of their own's mendacity--the astonishing tale of Jayson Blair. I'm fairly critical of the way the Times has handled this, actually. It seems clear that Blair was suspected for years and despite questions by senior editors (a senior editor for the Times wrote over a years ago: "We have to stop Jayson from writing for the Times. Right now.) and victims of his deceitful practices (i.e. the subjects of articles), in addition to having a terrible corrections record, nothing was done until the story got out.

This is the sure sign of a systematic failure and the Times rush to mea culpa, in encyclopaedic volume, smacks of a sort of cover up. Flood people with the sorry tale of a troubled youth but ignore that larger issue. In fact deny it: "Mr. Sulzberger [publisher of NYT] emphasized that as The New York Times continues to examine how its employees and readers were betrayed, there will be no newsroom search for scapegoats. 'The person who did this is Jayson Blair,' he said. 'Let's not begin to demonize our executives -- either the desk editors or the executive editor or, dare I say, the publisher.'"

Now no one's talking about "demonizing" anyone, but absent from the flood of coverage of the massive deception is little, if any, discussion about the systematic issue. Most simply: why wasn't this guy fact checked? Why were complaints from his subjects not taken seriously? Why was a senior editor ignored? And was it political correctness that prompted them to turn a blind eye to Jayson for so long?

However, to some of us this hasn't changed our view much of the NYT--while it's shocking to see the depth of this improbity I never trusted the New York Times much. I'm not saying they new about this, condone it, or that it's widespread. However, I didn't trust them because I felt they are pushing a political agenda in their news, where it doesn't belong, rather than in their op-eds, where it does.

The point is this: don't trust media. Many worry about the corporate control of media--and there are undoubtedly instances in which big media cave to the pressures of the organizations that own them or support them financially. But these critiques, and efforts to oppose FCC Chairman Powell's move to loosen media ownership rules, miss the point. ALL media shouldn't be trusted: whether it is political bias, petty fraud, business pressure, or even lazy reporting there are plenty reasons why reporting, even in the most reputable of sources, can be just flat our wrong. We should prosecute crime, but we will never be able to legislate, litigate, or regulate errors in media. Consumers will just have to learn to wise up.

The best solution: media diversity. This is why the explosion of media sources is such a powerful and important trend.

Consider a seemingly unrelated story surrounding the publishing of THE LANGUAGE POLICE: How Pressure Groups Restrict What Students Learn, by Diane Ravitch, in which the author tells the sordid tale of political correctness and other censorship in our text books. (See the NYTimes's book review.) This is a clear indication of the problem of concentrated information sources. The text book industry is monolithic and heavily influenced by buyers in Texas and California. Political pressures, from both left and right, drive down the quality to a lowest common denominator. We need diversity. We need choice. It's true in the private sector market for news as well as the text books force fed to our kids in public schools.

I hope that where the revolutions in online media is heading is for a market in information. Rather than paying reporters by the word, or by a flat salary, why shouldn't they be paid for performance? We peer review academic journals, why can't we peer-review (or reader review) news journalism? The technology is out there and Slashdot, among others, has shown us the way. I trust the people to keep the Jayson Blair's of the world honest more than I trust the imminently fallible publishers and editors at the New York Times.