Progressive Ponderings: The Fourth Estate
by Joe Mayer
Fourth Estate (noun) – the public press
Estate (noun) – social standing or rank, esp. of high order; a social or political class
The definition of "Fourth Estate" is inadequate. Why?
Put simply, it doesn't emphasize the high rank it has been given in democratic history. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution reads:
Polls taken in the United States throughout 2005, two years after the invasion of Iraq, indicated that the majority of U.S. citizens continued to believe that (1) ten Iraqis were involved in 9/11, and (2) Saddam did have weapons of mass destruction. This could not have happened without the cooperation of the press. Even though these two fabrications were proven false, many Americans still believe them to be factual. Administrative personnel, especially Vice President Dick Cheney, continue to infer and even declare them to be true, and the press continues to report Cheney's statements without comment.
On Wednesday evening, April 25, public television aired a documentary produced by Bill Moyers entitled "Selling the War." Moyers meticulously walked through the media's lockstep condescension to the administration leading up to and selling the imperative to go to war.
Nearly every major news organization in the United States except Knight-Ridder bought and subsequently sold the administration's fictitious "facts."
Under a dictatorship citizens know that "news" is nothing but the party line. But in a democracy citizens want to believe that the media is not abusing its freedoms and that the press is believable. Thus, when news is manipulated by a press more interested in its bottom line than in respecting its duty to accurately inform the citizenry, the press is just as accountable as its counterparts in a tyrannical dictatorship.
The name "Fourth Estate" indicates an independence and influence apart from any other power, and a responsibility and accountability to the nation and its citizens. When its power is purchased in the market just as any other commodity, it sacrifices truth for profit.
That's where we are today in the U.S.
It took the majority of our citizens three to four years (2001-02 to 2004-05) to extract the truth regarding the Iraq invasion and occupation. The citizens have moved beyond official explanations, but the press continues to regurgitate administrative spin as truth — or "news".
The Fourth Estate, the majority of which is owned by corporate conglomerates, answers to its power clients. These include advertisers whose first responsibility is to the bottom line, stockholders whose agenda is short-term profits, and government officials whose modus to paving the way to more power through deregulation and allowing monopolistic practices.
The result is that instead of fostering an informed, educated citizenry, we have a citizenry indoctrinated by corporate agendas, and one that is among the most depoliticized of any democracy in the current world.
What is the evidence? A low voting rate; the absence of reaction to the government's erosion of human, civil and constitutional rights; and the general lack of rebellion and protest (even a contempt for protest) as a citizen's right and duty.
The current trend in the corporate media is more consolidation, cutting investigative staff, the use of pooled resources, and an increased reliance on corporate-sponsored think tank "experts" (read: paid political shills) to provide analysis of the news. As the Moyers documentary points out, the same people who maneuvered us into Iraq are still featured prominently by the propaganda arm of the Fourth Estate.
The First Amendment was written to protect the press from the government. The question now is: How do we protect the press (and the media) from itself?
Fourth Estate (noun) – the public press
Estate (noun) – social standing or rank, esp. of high order; a social or political class
The definition of "Fourth Estate" is inadequate. Why?
Put simply, it doesn't emphasize the high rank it has been given in democratic history. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution reads:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press." In other words, our forefathers treasured the importance of the press enough to enshrine those rights in the First Amendment.
Polls taken in the United States throughout 2005, two years after the invasion of Iraq, indicated that the majority of U.S. citizens continued to believe that (1) ten Iraqis were involved in 9/11, and (2) Saddam did have weapons of mass destruction. This could not have happened without the cooperation of the press. Even though these two fabrications were proven false, many Americans still believe them to be factual. Administrative personnel, especially Vice President Dick Cheney, continue to infer and even declare them to be true, and the press continues to report Cheney's statements without comment.
On Wednesday evening, April 25, public television aired a documentary produced by Bill Moyers entitled "Selling the War." Moyers meticulously walked through the media's lockstep condescension to the administration leading up to and selling the imperative to go to war.
Nearly every major news organization in the United States except Knight-Ridder bought and subsequently sold the administration's fictitious "facts."
Under a dictatorship citizens know that "news" is nothing but the party line. But in a democracy citizens want to believe that the media is not abusing its freedoms and that the press is believable. Thus, when news is manipulated by a press more interested in its bottom line than in respecting its duty to accurately inform the citizenry, the press is just as accountable as its counterparts in a tyrannical dictatorship.
The name "Fourth Estate" indicates an independence and influence apart from any other power, and a responsibility and accountability to the nation and its citizens. When its power is purchased in the market just as any other commodity, it sacrifices truth for profit.
That's where we are today in the U.S.
It took the majority of our citizens three to four years (2001-02 to 2004-05) to extract the truth regarding the Iraq invasion and occupation. The citizens have moved beyond official explanations, but the press continues to regurgitate administrative spin as truth — or "news".
The Fourth Estate, the majority of which is owned by corporate conglomerates, answers to its power clients. These include advertisers whose first responsibility is to the bottom line, stockholders whose agenda is short-term profits, and government officials whose modus to paving the way to more power through deregulation and allowing monopolistic practices.
The result is that instead of fostering an informed, educated citizenry, we have a citizenry indoctrinated by corporate agendas, and one that is among the most depoliticized of any democracy in the current world.
What is the evidence? A low voting rate; the absence of reaction to the government's erosion of human, civil and constitutional rights; and the general lack of rebellion and protest (even a contempt for protest) as a citizen's right and duty.
The current trend in the corporate media is more consolidation, cutting investigative staff, the use of pooled resources, and an increased reliance on corporate-sponsored think tank "experts" (read: paid political shills) to provide analysis of the news. As the Moyers documentary points out, the same people who maneuvered us into Iraq are still featured prominently by the propaganda arm of the Fourth Estate.
The First Amendment was written to protect the press from the government. The question now is: How do we protect the press (and the media) from itself?
Labels: 1st Amendment, media, press
Powered by Blogger
1 Comments:
Before blaming the media, we need to blame ourselves.
Were you surprised when a survey reported that that 22% of Americans could name all five cartoon characters of the Homer Simpson family, compared with just 1 in 1,000 people who could name all five First Amendment freedoms?
Can we agree that there are three type of people : the un-informed, the ill-informed, and the informed.
Yes, the media has changed … and mostly for the worse.
The Libby trial exposed the closeness of the press to their subjects. Articles that are attributed to “an unnamed senior official” are now an immediate red flag in which the motivation of the speaker and the writer must be question.
Compound that with the GAO finding that the Department of Education paid $240,000 to conservative pundit Armstrong Williams in exchange for promoting the administration's No Child Left Behind education policy; or, the GAO concluding that the Bush administration had illegally spent taxpayer money from the Medicare Trust Fund for the "video news releases" that many television news programs across the country ran these as straight news segments without acknowledging that this was the Government’s opinion and not an independent news source; or, the creation of “Jeff Gannon” and the Talon News Service.
Even when reporters do good work, it’s an uphill battle that may not make any changes. Case in point -- Boston Globe Washington correspondent Charles Savage was awarded the 2007 Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting for series of articles uncovering the Bush Administration’s widespread practice of using “presidential signing statements” to circumvent hundreds of existing laws passed by Congress and signed into law by the president himself – albeit despite his efforts, Congress has been too busy with the Gonzales-8 inquiry to address the signing statement abuse.
And reporter Greg Palast has a OpEd in the LA Times in which he states “Until there is some official investigation or allegation made by a politician, there is no story. Or sometimes the media like to cover the controversy, not the substance, preferring an ambiguous and unsatisfying "he said, she said" report. Safe reporting, but not investigative.
The most important recent --and underreported -- effort by the Fourth Estate is NY Times Nicholas Kristof’s OpEd piece yesterday. He asserts that Iran seeked a diplomatic meeting which the Bush Administration turned down. Kristof writes “Iran talks about ensuring “full transparency” and other measures to assure the U.S. that it will not develop nuclear weapons. Iran offers “active Iranian support for Iraqi stabilization.” Iran also contemplates an end to “any material support to Palestinian opposition groups” while pressuring Hamas “to stop violent actions against civilians within” Israel (though not the occupied territories). Iran would support the transition of Hezbollah to be a “mere political organization within Lebanon” and endorse the Saudi initiative calling for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” WOW … those are bold proposals … and Kristof documents his assertions at blog site with copies of the documents. That is good reporting.
And the national media isn’t the only one being manipulated. See my commentary on my MinnesotaCentral blog how KEYC-TV “reports” Norm Coleman stories.
While the manipulation of the media is a concern, I find greater fault in the timidity of the media. The media seems to be able “talk” with one another about the issues, but once they get in the presence of the “target”, they shrink. If you saw Jon Stewart interview John McCain last week, McCain was actually reeling from the questioning … sad to say it but Stewart has stated that he could never interview President Bush because he would be too intimitidated. Most times, when politicians are on these programs – from The Daily Show to Meet The Press --- the questions are largely softballs and without follow-ups.
That said, if the professional Fourth Estate is faltering, the bloggers are not. Powerline forced evaluation of CBS claims on Bush’s military record. Steve Clement of The Washington Note produced a lot of pressure to thwart the John Bolton nomination. Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo dogged the Abramoff / Cunningham corrupton case … which has lead to the Gonzolas-8 investigation. For steady information, look no further than your own site or some its referenced bloggers.
It’s up to us … individually.
Post a Comment
<< Home