In this time of a global pandemic where information and communication has become increasingly important, an anxiety-evoking question comes to mind: who can we trust to provide information that can save our lives?
Historically, the news media has played a central role in global and national crises. However, in our current climate full of reporting discrepancies due to bias and astonishing party polarization should the media play the same role? There is legitimate concern that reporting platforms are distorting important health-related information to appeal to their parties based on decisions made in Washington. We are no stranger to “FAKE NEWS” claims by President Trump (see his full Twitter archive of these claims), but there comes a point in a global pandemic where no matter the politics, the public deserves a clear voice – not one littered with political ads and deceiving reports.
Central to this problem is the misguidance and confusion presented by the government in politically charged, rambling briefings. The messages often provide little guidance, and when they are informative, they seem to be reiterations of previous claims. This becomes problematic when the previously cancelled daily White House briefings are now being watched now as religiously as Monday night football.
Regardless of if every network relays government provided information verbatim, we will still receive conflicting, puzzling, and incorrect instruction. We task the media with the job of unwrapping the partisan messages, ego, and confusing repetition for a clearer report that is accessible to a broader range of the public. In this process, however, we mustn’t forget the patterned partisanship that is predictable from our news outlets.
In the world of journalism, it is no shock to see the right-wing outlets criticizing their more liberal counterparts. This disparage only grows as the crisis worsens. When major networks MSNBC and CNN took to not broadcasting the daily White House COVID-19 briefings live/in full, conservatives were quick to attack. The networks claimed to be trying to minimize the spread of misinformation and “propaganda” from the government, but counterarguments range from Democrats trying to hide the success of the Trump administration to them finally realizing that the virus really isn’t a big deal.
FoxNews headline regarding platforms unwilling to air briefings
While the networks were transparent in their reasoning to halt the showings of the briefings, I can’t help but wonder if there is a more proactive step to be taken here. Regardless of validity, many households across America will continue to watch these briefings. In my seminar class (Media and Politics), we discussed many measures that networks could take to ensure clearer takeaways from the reports. An idea that resonated with most was the addition of alerts or sidebars that could inform viewers of the validity of the statements being made during the full briefings. One step further, news platforms could debrief the meetings after air for anyone interested.
Whatever sort of strategic political communication is transpiring between the White House and national news networks, coverage of the coronavirus pandemic feels more orchestrated than ever before. These measures could ameliorate this issue. We have already seen a glimpse of this watchdog action, but more of it could prove useful. For example, responding to claims from President Trump and conservative networks adamant that no one could have known what was to come with the pandemic, journalists from the New York Times exposed that the administration was in fact warned – the advice simply was not heeded.
A New York Times accusing headline
It is impossible to ignore the great uncertainty surrounding this crisis, which is why politicians and journalists alike must be aware when making declarations to a global audience yearning for answers. Because information is being withheld from both the media and the public, we are all grasping at incomplete facts and reinforcing misconceptions. Clarification from the media in accessible and unbiased measures could be a step in the right direction to an informed public.
Comments
Post a Comment