How to Read the “News”

12-31-18

The Hartford Courant claims to be the longest running continuously published newspaper in the country. (It is part of the Tribune Publishing Company, owners of the Chicago Tribune, The Baltimore Sun and other daily newspapers as well as some periodicals.) The current editors of the Hartford Courant are unabashed supporters of the Democratic Party and their progressive left wing. It is the only major paper in Connecticut. Like many other “news” publications, including those with more conservative editorial boards such as the Wall Street Journal, The Courant uses its platform to foist its political leanings on readers. This Sunday’s (12/30/18) front page is a good example of how supposed news is actually analysis crossing over into opinion.

An article by Paul Kane of the Washington Post re-printed in the 12/30/18 Hartford Courant is indicative of the type of “reporting” that the Courant conducts. (The Courant regularly re-prints articles from other “news” organizations including the Chicago Tribune, Washington Post, AP and others.) I believe a critical reading of the article titled, “GOP message lost in impasse”, reveals exactly why readers must be extremely wary of information they glean from “news” outlets especially when they are cast to a wide audience through cross pollination.

The opening paragraph follows up on the leading headline. It says, “Republicans are ending the 115^th Congress in an all-too-familiar spot; standing on the sidelines while President Donald Trump picks a fight they wanted to avoid as he ignores what they consider major conservative accomplishments.” Nowhere in the article does it name any “Republicans” who have made statements to back up the premise they are “standing on the sidelines”. Instead, it goes off on the shutdown using a nine day old quote from the President and cites a fact that Congressman Ryan and Senator McConnell are not in Washington, neglecting another fact that virtually all Congressmen and Senators are not in Washington. Omitting this detail leaves the reader to surmise Republicans are not supporting the President. It might have used the actuality the Republican House passed a bill calling for funding the “wall” but that would not fit with their narrative.

Journalistic integrity demands that articles be labeled properly. Intertwining limited facts with interpretation confuses readers and leads them into false conclusions. This mislabeling leaves readers wondering what is real and what is fake. Few facts are used in reporting or are sprinkled in only when they support a particular position. It is troubling how supposed news articles contain unabashed opinion and analysis such as the example above. Casual readers take it as fact from this article that all Republicans are not in step with the President when in fact, by virtue of actual statements from the likes of Congressman Mark Meadows and others, at least some support him.

Beyond the introduction of analysis and opinion into supposed news articles, the use of unnamed sources for information has become the standard for journalism today. The lack of depth in reporting, cross pollination of organizations’ work and the mislabeling of analysis and opinion as “news” have readers wondering what to believe. This and the reliance of many on social media platforms for their news makes it more important than ever for consumers of news to be vigilant in checking facts and reading between the lines to fully understand the message.