Donald Trump’s persistent claim that the mainstream media are filled with “fake news” endangers democracy. His war on the media, of course, should not be viewed in isolation. It’s part of a broader strategy that includes rejecting scientific facts, dismissing government studies (even from his own Administration), and attacking well-researched reports from legitimate organizations. These can discredit and disempower any independent voice trying, however imperfectly, to provide us important truths and hold politicians to account. The President's charges are rarely accompanied by any supporting evidence.
Indiscriminate accusations of “fake news”
The President labels different types of news reports “fake news,” for example, reports he disagrees with, accounts he believes are biased, or news items based on anonymous sources. Even these charges, when repeated ad infinitum, are objectionable. But when he dismisses verifiable facts as “fake news,” the danger to democracy ratchets up several degrees. One can have legitimate differences of opinion about whether the media are fair to the President or consistently and inappropriately negative. But the size of the crowd at his inauguration compared to Obama’s inauguration is documented fact and can’t legitimately be challenged as “fake news.” As Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
First Amendment guarantee: a free press
Among other freedoms, The First Amendment guarantees a free press, unencumbered by government intervention. Censorship of the media obstructs the press’s vital role in uncovering and reporting corruption, unconstitutional government action, and other illegitimate activity. Without a free press, we would not have known about:
- the realities and deceptions of the Vietnam War,
- Watergate and its cover-up,
- the Reagan Administration’s illegal support of the Contras war against Nicaragua, or
- the false intelligence about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction used as a pretext for the Iraq war.
But what if the free press is not trusted?
If Trump’s attacks on “fake news” had no significant impact on the population, they might not be so important. A recent Gallup poll, however, showed that only 32% of Americans trust the media to “report the news fully, accurately and fairly.” Among Republicans, trust in the media is down to a shocking 14%. When only a small minority of American trusts the basic institution of the press, where does the majority find its sources of “truth” beyond their own eyes, their preconceived ideas and beliefs, or the widespread propaganda so easily available?
Two caveats are in order:
- The attack on the free press has been a political reality for many years, especially from the right but also from the left. American trust in the press has been below 50% since 2004. Donald Trump obviously bears no responsibility for most of the American decline in trust, although the further decline from August 2016 to August 2017 from 32% to 14% among Republicans is noteworthy. What is new, however, are the persistent and intense attacks on reports of factual reliability from the person occupying the highest office in the land.
- There is no question that the mainstream media occasionally makes serious mistakes, including getting their facts wrong. But the mainstream press corrects itself quickly. With very limited exceptions, the press keeps itself honest. Persistent reporting of provably “fake news” is rare.
I’m not particularly concerned that the mainstream press will capitulate to the President; in fact, it's been relentless in its continued investigative reporting of the Trump administration. (There’s so much reporting of every presidential mistake that, in my opinion, the media can fairly be accused of some bias.*)
But I am concerned that the President can sideline the press with his charges of “fake news.” When such a large percentage of Americans don’t trust the media to be accurate or fair, freedom of the press no longer protects our institutions. Under those conditions, access to the realities exposed and interpreted by the press is blocked almost as effectively as through censorship. For practical purposes, the institution of the press is no longer able to fulfill its primary responsibility as truth-teller.
Potentially worse, how many supporters agree with Trump’s efforts to “open up our libel laws”? How many believe that violence against journalists could do the country some good?** Where does that lead us?
A Darkness Over the Country?
A free press is essential to democracy, but if enough people mistrust the very institution of the press, it’s essentially no longer a source of truth. “Democracy,” the Washington Post reminds us, “dies in darkness.”
An Addendum to this post is published here
* There were several reports and pictures of the
President throwing out packages of paper towels to a crowd (like t-shirts at a
ball game). His actions showed a
stunning insensitivity to the plight of those devastated by the hurricane, but is
the media space devoted to these persistent pictures and articles worth more
than using that same news space to report on the wreckage of Puerto Rico
itself?
** Catherine Rampell,
Washington Post, July 17, 2017; https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-practical-reason-to-be-alarmed-by-republican-cries-of-fake-news/2017/07/17/f55cf662-6b2d-11e7-9c15-177740635e83_story.html
