Media

The performance of media has come under question in recent news reports and elsewhere:

• suggestions that a major news outlet may be pandering to the propaganda bias of its new Saudi owners; 
• a notorious UK platform has tried to launder the reputation of a notorious bigot, as one of its presenters has been accused of following up a moral panic episode with sexual misconduct; 
• a predictable backlash against #MeToo which actually is untrue; and
  
• a local TV channel approached a TGD person, claiming to be friendly to TGD people, and then, in a blatant example of bias and unprofessionalism, asked if the TGD person would be willing to be interviewed about which of two conspiracy fantasies “explained” TGD people! See here, and also here for a similar approach from another conservative media platform.
  

Media scrutiny bodies - formal and informal - have shown themselves to be incapable of noticing bigotry, and I’ve read various posts by journalists/former journalists (e.g., here, here, here, here, here, and here) decrying the ineptness and unprofessionalism of current platforms and journalists (this one is particularly good). 

If I’d thought about writing this post sooner, I would have kept the links together, but many are salted through recent posts (e.g., here, which is a specialist platform picking up something missed by mainstream media). 

The days of public service exposure seem to be long gone in many outlets - certainly from the right wing platforms, although some left wing and specialist platforms are still doing good work, including public service investigation and exposure (e.g., see here, here, here, and also this suggestion). 

Part of the problem from those outside the media is that mainstream media argues its lunatic fringe (the tabloid trash etc) has to be protected to protect freedom of expression.

That is rubbish on two counts: 

• freedom of expression is not unlimited - nor should it be.
  Spreading hate speech - and several outlets are actively contributing to a genocide - is not permitted, nor is destroying someone’s reputation (although there are shades of grey aka nuance on that topic); and 
• competent professionalism is capable of identifying and eradicating matters which should not be published.
  

On that last one, I consider many of the, frankly, extremist interpretations of what is required to be decent show either 

(a) a passive-aggressive malice, vindictiveness and spitefulness (which I have been contemplating writing about for some time now) that shows considerable immaturity; 

(b) incompetence at being human - predominantly emotionally, but possibly also some wilful amathia; or 

(c) both of the above. 

It’s not good enough, mainstream media. 

Do better, or risk disappearing into irrelevance and non-existence as your extremist supporters gradually die out.

Possible flaws 

Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider:

• there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan  Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking”; 
  
• I could be wrong - so keep your thinking caps on, and make up your own minds for yourself.
  

 

If they are of any use of interest, the activism information links from my former news posts are available in this post. 

 

If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below.

Vote Yes for the Voice in Australia.  

Finally, remember: we need to be more human being rather than human doing.