An Opportunity to Lead. An Opportunity to Break Out in U.S. Media
Although you might argue it has been over for some time now, this week’s announcement that Lester Holt will retire as the anchor of the NBC Nightly News, solidly marks the end of an era in broadcast television news. I suggest that Holt, and to a lesser extent ABC’s David Muir, are the last men standing with one finger tip still able to touch the memory of an earlier time when the person anchoring the nightly network news mattered.
Whoever replaces Holt, and the betting is on Tom Llamas, that person will be inheriting a diminished position in American journalism that faces continued further decline. The loss of audience has been happening for years, but what has also diminished is the qualifications to ascend to the role of anchor
There was a time in the not too distant past, when a network reporter would only be considered for the position of nightly news anchor after years of field reporting from the centers of power in the United States and overseas. In recent decades, those pre-qualifications have become less necessary and the primary qualification now is the ability to present the illusion of gravitas.
When it comes to media criticism, I try very hard not to be among those who pine for the good old days. I try to accept the world as it is, that’s why after some resistance, I’ve decided to publish on Substack. The means of news delivery, the means of production that were once necessary to deliver the news, are no longer necessary. You don’t see a broadcast license or an antenna array to deliver a video newscast. You don’t need a radio station to deliver a podcast. You don’t need a printing press to deliver news in print.
The question is not what do to about the decline of the evening news, the question is how do we build a system that is as reliable as what came before. If that is done through a website, or an app, so be it.
The American media traditions of the last hundred years are under attack from our government and from owners of legacy news organizations who are using their power to shape coverage.
The Associated Press and The White House Correspondents’ Association are in a battle with the Trump administration over who should have access to the president and when. There has been a tradition that has served both sides until now, but the president says he wants to call the shots on who covers him and who travels with him.
It is the job of the news media to fight back and to fight for access. The tradition of an independent press holding the powerful to account is a foundation of American democracy. The argument should be had. But in the present context it is appropriate to ask whether it really makes a difference.
As I have pointed out in previous posts, the current administration has a policy of lying. It is fair to say there is very little truthful or useful information that comes out of daily briefings from the White House press secretary, the president himself, or anyone who works in his administration. Does it really matter who is recording the president’s every word if you can’t trust or print anything he says? On some level, of course it does. On another level, if the job of the news media is to act not as a stenographer, but as a check on the truth, then it is true that most of the information reporters gather from the Trump White House is not worthy of publication.
At mid-week, Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos used his position — as is his right — to once again change the long-standing direction of the opinion pages of his newspaper. He directed that the opinion page focus only on what he called the “pillars” of “personal liberties and free markets.” He said the paper will be an advocate on these issues and will not publish opposing views. Other topics of public concern will be left to other publications and the free range of the internet. At the same time the announcement was made, David Shipley, the editor of the Post’s opinion section resigned.
As is often the case when the traditions of the American news media are upset there are people who complain and argue the change represents an affront to the free press, an end to journalism, and a loss for the country. The change in policy by Bezos de-values the Post as a source of news and information, but Bezos is right to say that the future of the country and the future of the news media does not depend on what gets published on the Post’s opinion page.
Changes in how news is gathered, disseminated, and consumed are inevitable. They have been happening for years and they will continue to happen. The question is; what do we as news consumers do about it?
As a society, we can no longer rely on large scale, trusted news organizations, to do all the work for us. As citizens we all have a responsibility to question who is gathering the news we consume, what is the publication’s point of view, and what is the nature of the policy motive.
The standards of an earlier time should not be tossed aside. In a news universe teeming with options there is a place for a few quality news organizations with high standards for reporting the truth to emerge as the most reliable source(s) for information about public affairs. Any legacy news organization or emerging news organization can play that role — can stand out as a pinnacle of truth and reliability — if that is the business model they choose to pursue.
All is not lost in American journalism, but the audience is looking for a leader.
For more on politics, public affairs, journalism, and public relations join me at Media Attaché on Substack https://deanpagani.substack.com/.
