Saturday, January 22, 2022

Whither Truth?

 On the occasion of its 15th anniversary, Politico has published the opinions of various experts on the question, “Is Media Doomed?”

As far as I could tell, none of them came up with a definitive answer but perhaps that’s because they asked the wrong question. For one thing, which forms of media are we talking about anyway?

It’s a fair assumption that human societies will always have some sort of media because we almost certainly have always had them. The original forms probably involved cave drawings and fireside gossip sessions.

The ways news travels in a pre-literate society — by word of mouth — persists even in the most highly techno-societies. Think about it — when you hear some news from a friend it can have more impact than from a venerated news source, right?

And in today’s environment, “media” encompasses a far broader swath of sources than the ones (including Politico) that I aggregate daily, because these are primarily traditional journalism outlets that normally adhere to the professional standards people like me believe in.

Information circulating via Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, SnapChat and other social media reaches at least as many people as these traditional outlets. Disinformation spread by QAnon, Trump and other extremist sources carve out their own sizable audience as well.

Governments, the academy, scientific groups, industry groups, public option pollsters, specialty publications, newsletters and individual authors affect the flow of stories, some reaching far more people than any traditional media could dream of.

Inside this cacophony, what exactly is “media” anymore?

Maybe that is another operative question.

The most common query I get from readers and friends is whether they can trust this or that source of information any longer. Skepticism even with the likes of the New York Times seems to be at an all-time high, and not just on the right.

Maybe it is our ability to trust that we need to be worried about. With so many competing points of view, optimists profess that the truth will win out. But whose truth exactly are we talking about?

Whether a story is strictly true or not is of major interest to us journalists, but I’m not so sure that is the case for our audiences. A good story — as long as it is mostly true — may be more satisfying to many than that which can strictly be proved to be so. Speculative pieces often prove to be exceptionally popular.

Maybe the question Politico should have posed is not so much about media but a much larger matter.

Is truth doomed?

SATURDAY’s HEADLINES:

No comments: