Name
Course
Professor
College
MSM vs. POTUS: An Issue with Misinformation
Dissention between the President of the United States (POTUS) and the mainstream media (MSM) is an issue that personally affects me, particularly on the aspect of not being able to get transparent data from reliable sources anymore. The media conflicting with the POTUS is not a new thing; a history of dissention that dates back to George Washington makes it clear that the Press will always challenge the leader of the country. (Dwyer, 2017) However, these behaviors leave a vast collateral damage. It makes some journalists dodge ethical reporting,allowing their anger to take the place of objectivity. Moreover, the MSM has branched out into so many forms, both official and unofficial,that newschannels are no longer the firm, rigorous, unbiased sources of information that I used to trust. It seems that the media is now used to deflect information, embellish facts, and create narratives that benefit a group of dissenters. The biggest damage from all this is the so-called “fake news” zeitgeist: the assertion claimed by all MSM groups that their competitors are telling lies. (Darnton, 2017) This childish diatribe affects society in that there is no longer a “go to” resource that people can consider reliable. A modern, and very temperamental MSM, combined with low ethical practices and too many channels of communication, are literally ruining the field of journalism. I simply no longer know what the true story is.
Like previously stated, the Trump administration is by no means the first to clash with the MSM. This history of dissention dates back to the days of George Washington, who once complained that he was being presented unfairly in the printed media. Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush similarly went under fire by news reporters who, in many occasions, bullied them to satisfy their personal or professional agendas. Back then, we could still count on our favorite news programs, and favorite reporters, to get our information and make our own conjectures. All this has ended. (Mitchell, Gottfried, Barthel, Shearer, 2016) From disgraced journalists, to the use of online analytics to trigger reactions, what we have today is such a focus to go against the President that the idea of giving news with a different spin seems unfathomable. People are more focused on sourcing arguments more so than sourcing data. It is understandable that entertainment engages more than analysis, but we have to do what we have to do.
The problem is not just the news itself being embellished or half-told; the delivery the news is just as asinine. The MSM digs at the POTUS, although expected, are so constant and accusatory that they sound no different than the complaints from the child in class who loves to tell on other children. Then there is the issue of the POTUS himself engaging with these half-professionals in a war of words. All I see is people attacking one another, and still no true analysis of the news being conducted. Even saying the source of news causes a dilemma: if the information comes from CNN, MSNBC, or CBS, the news is said to be biased in favor of the Democrats or liberals. If the information is sourced by Fox News, the assumption is that the Republicans have an agenda. (Engel, 2014) The sum of this all is that we, the citizens, have nowhere to turn. I feel that my only option is to keep my fingers crossed in the hopes that, in the middle of these battles of words behind the monitor, a real War does not suddenly show up from behind us, and takes us by surprise.
It is interesting that so many sources of communication, altogether and combined, do not amount to one powerful, all-knowing, objective source. The solution to this would be to conduct research on our own. To do the unthinkable: think for ourselves. To move toward the truth the only way we truth works: by educating ourselves. A newspaper will no longer give us the true facts that we need. Nowadays, we need to distance ourselves from fanatical social groups and retrace how things get started. If you hear that President so and so is an evil beast, learn why that perception came to be. You may be surprised. If someone accuses Senator whatever of being a womanizer, learn about the case and reach your own conclusions.
The best part is, that you do not have to share your views with the world. You can actually let your opinion remain private. A private and well-researched opinion will not encounter hatred or dissention on social media. In fact, doing your own research and not allowing others to dictate your mind will eventually, start sounding as something that makes sense. Can you see how far the brainwashing and pandering has gone, that we can no longer conceive thinking alone?
Take the first step, and research from actual sources: history books, textbooks, online encyclopedias, even ancient manuscripts online. All the data that allows us to put the story of a culture, a country, or a race of people together is the springboard that will keep you going, making more connections and learning more. I, for once, deviate from all the “scandal.” When a specific thing is being said in the same way in too many different mouths, that is my first indication that this is the one thing I will not believe until I research it. Do the same thing, and learn what an amazing difference it makes.
Works Cited
Darnton, Robert (2017) “The True History of Fake News” New York Books Review Online
Retrieved from on May 28, 2017
Engel, Pamela (2014) “Here's How Liberal Or Conservative Major News Sources Really Are” Politico Online retrieved from on May 28 2017
Mitchell, Amy; Gottfried, Jeffret; Barthel, Michael;. Shearer, Elisa (2016) “The Modern News Consumer” Journalism.com retrieved from on May 28, 2017