Proving that Alexa is right, the LA Times recruited Tom Rosenstiel, a former reporter and current journalism professor ,to author a candid but frightening essay that demonstrates exactly how deep the unethical cesspool of American journalism is today. The article is “How not to cover Donald Trump’s bizarre 2024 campaign for president,”and it broadcasts its bias and intellectual dishonesty at every turn, including the headline: Trump’s campaign is bizarre only because Democrats have taken the unprecedented and dangerous step of trying to stop a political adversary by using the criminal justice system as a partisan weapon.
The column states outright that it is the obligation of good journalists to cover the Trump campaign and candidacy in such a way that it fails. “It’s a dereliction of the press’ duty to ignore powerful dissemblers and liars in public life,” the professor writes. “We have an obligation to explain what’s false and offer clear and persuasive evidence of the truth. We have to help the public understand.”
If that last sentence doesn’t cause the date “1984” to start flashing in your brain, it should. These people really believe that their “understanding” is the right understanding. They are the perceptive ones, they are the arbiters of all disputes, disagreements and controversies. The arrogance is chilling, particularly because, as Ethics Alarms has pointed out repeatedly, journalists are not especially smart, wise, erudite or creative people. Some are, of course, just as one of my smartest and most ethical friends had driven a delivery van for 30 years. But the idea that reporters and journalists have the critical thinking skills, the breadth of knowledge and the depth of experience to tell the public “what’s false” would be hilarious if it didn’t do so much damage to the proper functioning of democracy.
Rosenstiel cites “journalists’ altered role’ as the justification for reporters setting out to sabotage Trump. Huh…I wonder who altered that role? Who approved that alteration? Oh, it was just “altered,” that’s all. This is more deception: what has occurreed is that an overwhelmingly leftist profession whose codes of ethics required neutrality and objectivity decided it could have more power and influence if it junked journalism for political activism and progressive propaganda.
Thus, in keeping with his mission of calling on today’s pseudo-journalists to perform their “altered role,” Rosenstiel advises them to…
- Try to anticipate what Trump will say in an interview, and have rebuttal points and facts prepared. It doesn’t bother the LA Times that what Rosenstiel is describing is an partisan adversarial relationship that is the antithesis of journalism. To be fair, it isn’t exclusively Trump that the writer advocates handling like this. He also mentions Ron DeSantis. There is no need for similar preparation when interviewing Democrats.
- “The campaign biography should be a full-time beat, not a one-day story. Reporters should focus on telling us who the candidates are, what they have done, how they have led, the impact of their choices, how they treat other people and more. And modern storytelling forms can present this information more effectively and accessibly than the classic candidate biography.” This would be valid advice, it it were not framed as how to neutralize Donald Trump. Only a tiny proportion of political journalists—conservatives— work to reveal the less savory aspects of Democrats like Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama and others. How many current voters know about Biden plagiarizing an Irish politicians speech, or about the disturbing claims of his daughter in her diary? How many know that Kamala Harris’s career was launched by her serving as the mistress of a powerful San Francisco mayor?
- “Campaign coverage should focus more on the biggest problems facing the country, from inflation to climate change to the resilience of our democracy, and tell us what the candidates have done and can be expected to do about them.…If a candidate doesn’t really have a record on an issue or much apparent understanding of or interest in it, reporters need to make that clear.” Got that? Focus on “the biggest problems” as defined in Woke World, where Democrats rule supreme and journalists are lapdogs. Trump and other conservatives believe illegal immigration, failing law enforcement, over-regulation, indoctrination in the schools, and the Left’s attack on the Bill of Rights are “the biggest problems.” Rosenstiel just told us how journalists rig elections.
- “Better fact-checking.” Right. Rosensteil wants the subjective and inherently manipulative practice to seem more trustworthy: all the better to undermine politicians journalists don’t like.
You want scary? Happy Halloween! Here’s the last sentence:
“If, on election day, the result seems inexplicable, that is a failure of journalism.”
Inexplicable to whom? Journalists and Hillary Clinton found the 2016 result “inexplaicable,” because bias made them stupid. What Rosenstiel is saying is that “responsible journalists” have a duty to manipulate the news and slant reporting so that election results are “explicable,” meaning consistent with how journalists like him want people to vote.
Once again, I have to state: Donald Trump was never more correct than when he pronounced the new media as “the enemy of the people.” Rosentheil’s attitude is the prevailing one in today’s journalism. It was nice of him to be so open about it.
Oh—Geena wants the final word…
Ethics Alarms 
Now where are the wokesters to refute and deny the (obvious) political/cultural bias in mainstream journalism?
If only the woke were more civilized, raised better, understood the value of good manners and respect, because it is more fun when they are around. This post would have made them very excited.
Yup.
I’ve had so many discussions/arguments about this very topic. It’s amazing how steadfast most lefties/Dems supporters are in denying that blatant left-bent of most MSM. I’m not if they truly don’t see/hear it (maybe it’s a result of existing in lefty bubble, so they assume it’s just fact/truth), or if they know but feel obligated to argue back.
Ron, I think they deny any “bent” because the behavior any rational person would describe as a “bent” is simply acting upon revealed truth and hastening the perfection of humanity and the human condition. Through various government programs. They’re not in denial, they are the saved. Anyone who disagrees can go to hell. Or a red state.
“Anyone who disagrees can go to hell. Or a red state.” (bolds mine)
Au contraire, mon frere, they…LEFTUGEES…will follow you there.
PWS
This guy’s attitude makes me realize how totally the left has dominated American politics, policy and culture for the last fifty years, i.e., my adult lifetime. I did not realize how in control they were and felt. There was never supposed to be another Republican president or Congress after Obama’s glorious two terms ended. The Bill and Hill Show was supposed to be back on the air for another eight years and then, oh say, Michelle Obama was supposed to bring Barack back for another eight years of hope and change. We’d witness the end of history. The reactionaries would finally be vanquished, undone by the arc of history and demographics. Everything was fine and then a guy came along and single-handedly ruined everything. What a depressing development the last fifty years have wrought.
My reaction exactly. The certitude of this guy is shocking. It’s like the way the racists talk to each other about blacks in “Mississippi Burning,” like their bigotry is just the Truth, and everyone knows it. Similarly the lack of self-awareness, and the failure of this journalism ‘expert” to recognize the import of his own words.
It’s the way seventy-year-old lawyers, MBAs and physicians talked at my fiftieth college reunion in the northeast. Or Paul Krugman: “If people only knew how good they have it and what’s good for them….”
HRC talked about reprogramming Trump cultists. The reprogramming apparatus is nearly complete given the dominant influencers in the media, education, politics are already entrenched. Once, business of any size is effectively coerced by the above player to adopt the approved narrative or face financial ruin the vision of HRC et al will be hard to fight.
To believe that an effort to deprogram a massive population is impossible or even unlikely is wishful thinking. This is the goal whether they use theJustice department’s FBI to ferret out their opposition for prosecution or eliminating all countervailing viewpoints presented in the media. The question remains do the majority of Americans value the Constitutional protections afforded to them or the financial payoffs from the politicians for their parochial interests.