Truth Telling or Selling?
Media that focus on one can’t be trusted with the other
To close 2023, I present a three-part series on what I think was the year’s biggest story in news media. It wasn’t a seismic shift, but because it involved one of the most influential producers of political news, it will have a huge impact on coverage of the 2024 presidential campaign. It already has.
Part I will lay the groundwork before I reveal the story.
Imagine you love Big Macs, but you’re concerned about how frequently you can eat them without significant health risk. You seek advice.
You find an article in Nutrition Monthly, which says the 7,000-calorie sandwich obviously shouldn’t be a diet staple. But if you eat well most of the time, get some exercise and don’t have high cholesterol, go ahead and treat yourself every once in a while.
Then you read an article in Vegan Forever, which says people who eat fried burgers regularly have seven-year shorter lifespans on average than vegans. The article includes a helpful sidebar describing in graphic detail how the cows at McDonald’s supplier ranches are mistreated.
You check one final source: the McDonald’s franchisee newsletter, which reports on a recent study that suggests Big Mac eaters are wealthier, healthier, and smarter than other folks and report having a more active sex life. Attached to the article is a coupon for 50% off your next Big Mac Meal.
How reliable is each of these sources? Nutrition Monthly seems to strive to be objective, weighing the pros and cons of eating Big Macs. You’re reasonably confident of its accuracy. This particular article had a correction attached: Because of a typo, the article misreported the number of calories in a Big Mac sandwich; it’s actually 70,000 calories. But in a way, that builds your confidence of Nutrition Monthly, since it’s upfront when it makes a mistake.
Vegan Forever is decidedly not objective, but you give it a certain type of trust. You know you’re getting one side of the story, the downside of eating a Big Mac, but you believe Vegan Forever will present that side honestly. It might even acknowledge the benefits of a Big Mac (they’re freaking delicious), if only to argue against those benefits.
The McDonald’s franchise newsletter is a different story altogether. The publication’s very existence depends on millions of people eating Big Macs. It will not hesitate to share every factoid, rumor or outright fabrication that reflects well on Big Macs. Each paragraph intersects with the truth only by convenience or coincidence.
I find it useful to group media into three categories:
Objective Reporter - that’s Nutrition Monthly. It attempts to present the truth, regardless of who benefits and who loses.
Biased Story Teller - that’s Vegan Forever. It argues for a certain viewpoint, deploying mostly facts and reasonable arguments.
Advocate - that’s the McDonald’s franchise newsletter. Its primary purpose is to support the cause by any means necessary.
If you’re trying to understand what’s going on, 1) is easily the most useful. It’s not infallible. You should still approach it with some level of skepticism. But day-in, day-out, it’s going to present a picture generally closest to the Platonic ideal of objective truth.
Media that falls under 2) can be helpful, too. You’re not getting the whole story, but the 50% you are getting is mostly truthful. If 1) is analogous to a judge, then 2) is analogous to the prosecutor - mostly honest, but it’s trying to persuade you, rather than trying to present all the relevant facts.
Media that fall under 3) are like commercials. Commercials can contain elements of truth. Subarus really are safe cars; you really can find everything you need to repair the bedroom wallboard at Lowe’s. But since their reason for existence is to promote something rather than express a truth, they are worthless if you’re trying to persuade someone that you’re right.
And they should be. Media advocates don’t get up every morning and ask, “What’s going on in the world that our audience needs to know about?” They ask, “What happened today that can make our side look good and their side look bad? And if we can’t find anything today, then what about last week or last year?” If you were trying to convince a Trump supporter that he’s a fascist, do you think she’d be persuaded by the latest mailer from the Democratic National Committee?
In Part II, we’ll discuss the biggest news media story of 2023.