Journalism as Advocacy

I read the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) daily, Hartford Courant regularly and reference and read articles in Politico, Breibart and use the Drudge Report and Associated Press to further find “news”. The latest journalistic snafu from the New York Times compels me to draw attention to what exactly journalism has devolved to in the time of Trump. Because I am so familiar with the WSJ, I’ll use it as my most pronounced example but let me be clear, I find these attributes in most publications that present themselves as “news”.

In the 9/18 edition of the WSJ, authors Rebecca Balhaus and Siobhan Hughes under an article titled, “Trump Aide Rebuffs Panel”, they recant 6 short quotes from a 6-hour meeting; one from the President who obviously was not present. Using adjectives that paint Mr. Lewandowski in an unfavorable light, (stony-faced) they give only 1 quote from him. They provide the committee with cover for having Mr. Lewandowski testify by saying it “…allows them to highlight the White House’s obstruction of its investigation…” as if that is a fact. The closing paragraph is the clearest example of how these “reporters” are really advocates. It tags the article, which was about a committee hearing, with an entire closing paragraph on the Mueller report and spins the findings in what is now seen as a concerted effort to minimize the damage from it for not having found any collusion or obstruction. These reporters do not want to miss a chance to continue the narrative with the intent to make it stick.

While editorial boards may display a certain amount of discretion when commenting, they are labeled appropriately as editorials or comments and not news. As is the case with the WSJ and other “newspapers”, the editorial board is nearly 180 degrees different in political position than the reporters and news editors. These Boards unfortunately lend credence to the body of their papers that is ill-placed. The bulk of these news outlets are filled with biased presentations of actions and person’s words that relay a certain political persuasion but are labeled as “news” and not analysis. It is abundantly clear that we now have a 4^th estate that seeks to persuade rather than inform. Is it any wonder that most voters are now subject to the whims of those who have advocacy as their main objective?