Who determines the truth?
In the aftermath of the killing of George Floyd (and the subsequent civil unrest), a theory has emerged that news organizations should exercise "moral clarity" while advocating for the "truth" (rather than attempting to sustain a phony pretense of impartiality).
This premise deserves some scrutiny (if this is still permitted in journalism).
The obvious question is this: Who determines the truth?
This question is not an attempt to advocate for moral relativism. But we live in a pluralistic society, and politics is messy. While some things are certainly black and white, it’s possible for intellectually honest people who are acting in good faith to arrive at dramatically different conclusions on a wide variety of things.
It seems clear to me, for example, that abortion is immoral, that divorce is bad for children, and that it is better to advocate for school choice than it is to lock kids in failing schools.
I’m not being entirely facetious when I say that I could make a pretty good case that these policy preferences are objectively true.
Should accepting these moral truths be required to work in mainstream journalism?
I wouldn’t seek to impose those views on any of my colleagues, partly because it’s boring and partly because it’s authoritarian. Or, as Crash Davis says in Bull Durham, “Strikeouts are boring, and besides that, they’re fascist.”
Today’s “woke” young journalists may think they’re being bold, creative, and original, but what is actually being advocated is a sort of illiberal authoritarianism that is presumptuous, condescending, and (yes) reductionist. Indeed, what they are advocating is more akin to activism than it is to journalism.
The world is complex. And rather than permitting an open-minded environment where journalists and opinion leaders are free to test provocative ideas and see where the facts lead them, we are creating a 'cancel culture' where they are instead bullied into conforming with the dogma of the day.
If this ethos becomes the industry consensus (and it seems to be heading that way), you can expect even more media fragmentation, polarization, and epistemic closure. Liberal readers and writers will all cluster together inside their respective bubbles spreading their “truth,” and conservative readers and writers will do the same.
If you think we’re already living in two Americas where you can live your life and rarely have your political views challenged, you ain’t seen nothing, yet.
Beware the person who is 100% certain what the truth is and wants to impose it on others. To assume that we, as journalists, always know the truth is a fatal conceit.
Listen to the latest podcast episodes ...
Carl Cannon On This Date (Rebroadcast)
> Click here to listen online
Angel Brunner on Driving While Black
> Click here to listen online
David Frum Returns to Talk Trumpocalypse
> Click here to listen online
Want to get new "Matt Lewis & the News" podcast episodes as soon as I post them? Subscribe to my iTunes, Google Play, or Stitcher feeds.
Please consider supporting my work on Patreon
Your support helps me produce "Matt Lewis & the News" and expand the content that I offer to subscribers like you. In addition, you'll get some awesome swag and exclusive access to special content, like mini-podcast episodes.
Yes, I want to support "Matt Lewis & the News" on Patreon