Press "Enter" to skip to content

Journalists Must Respond to Trump with Absolute Commitment to Truth

An eager commenter directs our attention to Harvard lecturer Yascha Mounk’s guide to resisting propaganda (a much better term than the unhelpful and oxymoronic “fake news”; other superior alternatives include “lies” and “clickbait“). After jamming RT, Putin’s state-propaganda wing, with an indictment of the Putinist–Trumpist politicization of independent state institutions, curtailment of freedom of speech and press, and peddling of blatant lies, Mounk offers practical steps for all journalists and other defenders of freedom to take against our incoming dictator’s gold-plated empire of lies. My favorite is Mounk’s advice to journalists to shed the pretense of neutrality and fight openly for truth:

…while we need not waste our time disproving every last conspiracy theory, however outlandish, we must be unwavering in our commitment to a politics based on the truth. One part of this is to dispense with the false neutrality that has long prevailed in American media. When two reasonable political parties make diverging yet reasonable arguments for diverging yet reasonable policies, it makes sense to treat their claims with equal respect. By contrast, when some politicians have started to invent claims at will, without bothering to produce evidence for them or to make their lies internally coherent, it is a retreat from truth-based politics to treat them as though they were equivalent. Big newspapers should beware becoming political partisans—but lest they cease serving any real function, they must become proud partisans of the truth [Yascha Mounk, “How to Resist Propaganda,” Slate, 2016.12.13].

The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth—that should be the easiest thing in the world to write and defend. And if Republicans offer us a President who ignores the truth, while Democrats have the pesky tendency of speaking the truth, journalists can still objectively report, “The Republican President is lying to us, and Democrats are telling us the truth.”

20 Comments

  1. o 2016-12-14 12:30

    Even this article and thinking skips the first intuitive step: deciding fact and truth is important – that fact and truth matter. if fact and truth do not matter, then lying is of no consequence.

    The banners like “fair and balanced” or “teach the controversy” work to erode not only the line between fact and lies but the whole value of fact.

  2. mike from iowa 2016-12-14 13:16

    Prof. David Newquist at Northern Valley Beacon has laid out a clear path by which us timid and, in my case pacisfistic, Libs can water the tree of Liberty with un- patriotic and therefore contaminated blood of treasonous nut jobs. But, we need to do this together as one. Is our country worth fighting for? Many hundreds of thousands of our finest fought and died for the country that Drumpf and Russians just stole from us. What will we do?

  3. bearcreekbat 2016-12-14 13:21

    mfi – great link, thanks! the West World analogy is powerful.

  4. o 2016-12-14 13:36

    Mike, Van Jones addressed this (in a round about way). He speaks of the importance of engaging the Trump voters. His point is that he knows many veterans (for example of a group) who voted for Trump, but if the President does something against Muslims (for example of an issue), those vets will be standing shoulder-to-shoulder with him in protest and disagreement of that action. His point is that the issues will determine out actions and we will not just look “within our ranks” for support. Maybe if enough stand with us against enough of the actions of the president, they will stand with us against that person as well. Fighting for a country seems too big to take on, fighting for issues can be managed.

    How do you eat an elephant . . .?

    Really is that answer so much different from the election of anyone to any office: we stand with them on the issues we agree with and stand against them on issues we do not. We do not allow ourselves to be trapped in monolith thinking.

  5. jerry 2016-12-14 13:43

    I don’t know if the SDDP has actually been told about the Russian attack on our soil or if they know what that means. They have been informed but maybe do not bother to check those reports as they might be busy doing stuff. But they should be the ones who put this information in the weekly papers that go out to the areas for free as public service, just like Daugaard, Thune, NOem and the other guy get to do. They could start by asking Daugaard why he is voting for support of the Russian involvement in this attack, that would be a good start. Then they could ask Thune why he is in cahoots with the Republican leadership on this attack. There are plenty of resources to go to for that information. If you cannot beat them at the ballot box at least make them answer for their treasonous actions, who knows, maybe they are being blackmailed as the RNC was also hacked. Let them know that we will stand together to fight this attack.

  6. Roger Elgersma 2016-12-14 16:38

    So far this election we have taught the kids that the biggest liar wins. So now if we slap it in his face every time he lies the kids will learn that everyone needs to quit lying, even the president.

  7. bearcreekbat 2016-12-14 16:41

    Jerry’s idea seems a good one. If the SDDP took aggressive action by frequently writing about issues and then submitting columns to our daily newspapers, like Dauguard, Thune, Noem and Rounds regularly do, perhaps SD voters would benefit by reading about the issues and the SDDP’s position on these issues. As it is, I seldom, if ever, have seen columns like this from the SDDP representatives in our RC Journal.

    This might also be a means to provide correct and accurate information in response to some of the false and misleading statements and claims we regularly see in these politicos’ columns. Well written timely topics in such columns would also provide fodder for conversations about issues and the SDDP with young folks, which might just start a movement (thanks “Alice’s Restaurant”).

  8. jerry 2016-12-14 16:56

    Thanks bcb, now the SDDP should also make note of Vlad’s popularity rise among Republcans and how that seems kind of…you know..un-American. Is Un-American even a word association now? I mean, we have fallen through the reality check some time ago, but this is really weird. Now, if we no longer have use for the large expense of military because of this takeover by Russia, perhaps we can abandon it in favor of hobbies for the wealthy. Maybe catapult fat guys or something. Maybe Hunger Games, oops, we already are doing that.

  9. mike from iowa 2016-12-14 17:21

    williamjordan needs to do a graph on how unfavorably wingnuts view America.

  10. Jana 2016-12-14 17:43

    BCB hits the nail on the head.

    Add to that we need someone in Pierre to keep the GOP honest during the legislative session that can report from the committee hearings and identify the winners and losers from one party rule. Shine some sunlight on self dealing, crony capitalism and who is writing and influencing our laws. This is especially important when we look at the state of media coverage during the legislature…or should I say lack of coverage.

    Cory, how much would it cost to send you to Pierre as a reporter during the legislative session?

  11. Jana 2016-12-14 22:17

    As long as we’re talking about journalists, why hasn’t any South Dakota media asked our congressional delegation about the Russian/Putin involvement in our Democracy?

    Certainly Thune, Rounds and Noem must be greatly disturbed by this influence from a communist country and dictator.

    For that matter, Thune and Rounds have advise and consent powers, but have stayed silent on the potential threats from Trump appointees who could threaten our farmers and producers…hmmm.

    Not to mention that Noem had the chance to at least meet with the president-elect to discuss ag issues and decided against it when she could have stood up for corn farmers in South Dakota.

    Aren’t these people supposed to be representing South Dakota? Wait…What?!?!

  12. Loren 2016-12-14 22:36

    Jana, we don’t have to ask our SD delegation their thoughts. Their thoughts are the Republican daily talking points. You can get those by watching any Faux News broadcast.

  13. jerry 2016-12-14 22:55

    NBC journalists, It is Putin himself involved with election fraud. http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/u-s-officials-putin-personally-involved-u-s-election-hack-n696146

    Anybody want to guess when the Sioux Falls, Aberdeen, Mitchell and Rapid City papers find out that we have been hacked by a foreign adversary? What will it take for Daugaard, Michels and burr head to finally admit they are willing to vote for an enemy rather than to vote for the United States of America? When do they admit they are all in for treason?

  14. Richard Schriever 2016-12-15 08:38

    Jana – FYI – Russia is no longer a communist state. It is a Fascist, racist, oligarchy. Putin himself owns the largest oil company in Russia. It is not state owned. It’s owner owns the state. This is why Trump admires him so, and is modeling his handling of the ownership of his own company after Putin’s ownership of Russia.

  15. Richard Schriever 2016-12-15 08:39

    BTW Moscow has the highest per capita number of BILLIONAIRES of any city on earth.

  16. jerry 2016-12-15 10:13

    12-15-16 and still no state news about the Russian takeover of the elections and in particular, the presidency. All of the news readers have apparently gone on vacation or are just to busy trying to find human interest stories to captivate their audiences.

  17. caheidelberger Post author | 2016-12-15 21:50

    Jana! Sorry to leave you hanging on that question. We figured I could afford to spend Session in Pierre on legislator pay and per diem; I suspect a similar amount would make it possible for me to spend Session researching and reporting from the Capitol.

    Keep in mind, though: I might have trouble getting Al Novstrup to sit for an interview. Of course, given that Republicans have abandoned using words with meaning, such interviews may be unnecessary.

Comments are closed.