My last post, Turkey Table Talk,1 got some responses that said, great post, but it doesn’t apply to me because I don’t have any “Uncle Charlie’s” among my family or friends. Or, I have this one Trumper relative, but I haven’t seen them in years.
It got me thinking. An uncomfortable thought for us all to ponder: Is it a good thing that there are few or no Republicans among our family and friends anymore? How did it come to be that we, as a society, became so polarized? How much responsibility do we bear individually for pulling away and leaving the "lost causes" to themselves--to leave them unchallenged to stew in the lies spewed by Trump, Bannon, and Carlson?
I am guilty of this. We all have some good excuses for how the othering started. My personal one was needing more than 2 years of recovery from long-haul COVID. But I am guilty, nonetheless, because I checked out the bumper sticker on a possible new friend’s car after yoga class.
In retrospect, I see that it is much harder now to do the necessary work of building those relationships back, and of building new ones than it would have been earlier. I also see that they can only be built back one relationship at a time, one conversation at a time, by us.
There are two main reasons why we must take up this responsibility:
the complete polarization of the major media that speak essentially exclusively to their respective bases
the media devolution into cheap-to-produce, highly profitable clickbait reporting, with the concomitant shrinking of newsrooms and the loss of local news coverage.2
Quoting Philip Elliott from Time:
The media landscape has changed over the last 20 years in vast ways, with online publishing and advertising threatening our business offices and assumptions in ways great and small. It’s no secret that we as an industry have struggled to keep up. But beyond hollowed-out newsrooms or shuttered papers, the broader threat is one to democracy itself, one that will be more noticeable in 2024 than any previous election cycle. Without independent journalists to cover, analyze, and query candidates and their campaigns, voters are left to rely on the spin and propaganda that the political machines themselves churn out. Some of it is quite good, but none of it is self-critical. After all, Rep. George Santos arrived in Congress with very little friction blocking his acquisition of a voting card as a fabulist from New York. Without someone standing ready with a notebook, tape recorder (or iPhone app, as the case is nowadays), and just plain clear eyes on a candidate, voters aren’t really getting the full picture…
…At the U.S. Capitol, Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota has been championing a bill to help local newsrooms compete for ad dollars against tech giants. As Klobuchar, a daughter of a newspaperman, knows, no one is better at interpreting local events than the people who live in those communities. The death of expertise is simultaneously bad for the newsrooms, but also voters.
The political press doesn’t always get it right—my Twitter replies are proof enough of that view—but it fills an important role in helping voters understand the issues and stakes of a campaign. Without that coverage, voters are left to listen to whichever candidates’ ads can dominate the airwaves and digital screens, most of it guided by the whims of deep-pocketed donors. That, put plainly, isn’t what democracy should look like, especially not in a part of the country where hyper-local candidates can often defy national trends, if only someone credible is there to explain why. (Emphasis mine).
In June 2023, Axios reported that as of June 1, 2023:3
The news industry is facing huge constraints due to a slowdown in the ad market, debt from consolidation and subscription fatigue.
Broadcast, digital and print news outlets have collectively announced 1,972 cuts so far this year, surpassing the 1,808 announced in all of 2022.
Newspaper reportage has been a mainstay of investigative reporting for well over 100 years, since the days of the muckrakers. It hits the sweet spot in terms of the depth of coverage that is needed for readers to have enough information to make reasoned judgments. It is fast going by the wayside. Pew Rew Research published a detailed review of newsroom employment trends in July 2021.4
Since 2008, newsroom employment has plummeted at U.S. newspapers while increasing in the digital publishing sector. Newspaper newsroom employment fell 57% between 2008 and 2020, from roughly 71,000 jobs to about 31,000. At the same time, the number of digital-native newsroom employees rose 144%, from 7,400 workers in 2008 to about 18,000 in 2020. Despite this sharp increase, the number of newsroom employees in the digital-native sector remained about 13,000 below the number in the newspaper sector in 2020.
The sharp decline in newspaper jobs means the sector now accounts for a smaller portion of overall newsroom employment than in the recent past. In 2008, newspaper employees made up about six-in-ten newsroom jobs overall (62%). By 2020, the share had dropped to fewer than four-in-ten (36%). In 2020 alone, a third of large newspapers in the U.S. experienced layoffs, and as of August 2020, nearly 2,800 newspaper companies had received federal aid through the Paycheck Protection Program, according to previous Pew Research Center analyses.
The deterioration in local and regional papers has had a huge impact. There are large areas of the country that are “news deserts.”5
The United States continues to lose newspapers at a rate of two per week, further dividing the nation into wealthier, faster growing communities with access to local news, and struggling areas without.
Between the pre-pandemic months of late 2019 and the end of May 2022, more than 360 newspapers closed, the report by Medill’s Local News Initiative found. Since 2005, the country has lost more than one-fourth of its newspapers and is on track to lose a third by 2025.
Most of the communities that have lost newspapers do not get a print or digital replacement, leaving 70 million residents — or a fifth of the country’s population — either living in an area with no local news organizations, or one at risk, with only one local news outlet and very limited access to critical news and information that can inform their everyday decisions and sustain grassroots democracy. About 7 percent of the nation’s counties, or 211, now have no local newspaper.
“This is a crisis for our democracy and our society, said Penelope Muse Abernathy, visiting professor at Medill and the principal author of the report. “Invariably, the economically struggling, traditionally underserved communities that need local journalism the most are the very places where it is most difficult to sustain print or digital news organizations.”
Recent research shows that, in communities without a strong print or digital news organization, voter participation declines and corruption increases, Abernathy said, contributing to the spread of misinformation, political polarization and reduced trust in media.
These are the places that are ripe for the takeover of local school boards and town and county governments, that are spawning book-banning initiatives. They are becoming the places where groups like Moms for Liberty thrive.
The bottom line is that it is up to us, individually and collectively, to take action to rebuild those ties and connections so that we can cut through the polarization and talk to our family members and neighbors on the “other” side. We can’t let the potential discomfort of doing that stand in the way. Our institutions are simply not up to the task.
How can we make an impact? First and foremost, and most critically, by informing ourselves about the issues that are important to our friends and family. There are numerous writers on independent media like Substack that provide leads to unbiased first sources, like the text of bills, and voting records of politicians, as well as in-depth reporting. And then, we have to reach out to family, friends, and neighbors with empathy and respect.
It’s not the odds; it’s the stakes.
Georgia, my brother is a Trump Republican. A couple of years ago I tried to talk to him and it devolved into a tirade on his part and a storming away on my part.
We have since formed a truce, and we do not discuss politics, especially at holiday gatherings.
That is the only way in a situation like this, at least for the two of us.
I have recently met a woman with whom I share a career in middle school education. We both like needle work, and we have dogs that like each other. Those commonalities make a growing friendship seem likely.
I do not want to broach the subject of politics with her. What if I learn that she does support Trump and the Republican party? After all we know about Donald Trump, how can we possibly respect a person who still supports him? I can be friends with people who have different opinions about many things. But the values of a person who respects Donald Trump are too far afield for me.
On the other hand, I can see that broaching the subject now may save a lot of heartache. If I wait until we become closer friends, then a real friendship might have to end.
I'll let you know how it goes. I don't think it will take long for the hints to begin to drop. We're supposed to meet for a walk with our dogs today.
Thanks for your work. I have to admit a lot of it is difficult for me to understand and retain. Still I feel like I'm getting a broader awareness. I sure appreciate your expertise and communication style.
Robert Hubbell wrote in his Today's Edition Newsletter on Substack on 11/17/23:
"Journalism professor Jay Rosen of NYU has been urging news media organizations across the nation to adopt the following mantra for their 2024 coverage:
'Not the odds, but the stakes.'
As reported [by] Oliver Darcy in CNN’s Reliable Sources,
[P]rofessor Jay Rosen has evangelized across the news industry over the last several months. With less than a year until the 2024 elections, Rosen has been imploring newsrooms to organize their campaign coverage around the enormous stakes of the presidential contest — not the horse race.
As CNN correctly notes, the root cause of 'horse race' journalism is laziness (and a desire to increase revenue):
[S]ounding the alarm on Trump's disturbing conduct is more difficult than engaging in horse race coverage. Focusing on the polls can help news organizations dodge thorny issues, such as Trump's use of vile rhetoric. That allows them, perhaps, to avoid the perception among some in the public that they're unfairly biased.
'Not the odds, but the stakes for US democracy.' We should extend that concept to nearly every objection, rationalization, or firmly held belief for not supporting Joe Biden in 2024. Not Biden’s age, but the stakes. Not inflation, but the stakes. Not disagreements over Israel, but the stakes. Not anger over Biden’s inability to implement the full progressive agenda, but the stakes.
Not the odds, but the stakes. Repeat often, hold the press accountable, and hold one another accountable. The stakes are set, the odds are not. We can change the odds through hard work and constancy! Stay the course!"