George Orwell skal have sagt “Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.” Og det er lige, hvad de oftest er, PR maskiner. Det var ikke TV2, der afslørede Festinaskandalen, selv om de kendte til den industrialiserede doping, som Jørn Mader kom for skade at afsløre, da han under en etape udbrød “Og her ser vi Rudolfo Massi, også kendt som det rullende apotek!”. Det var ikke Hollywoods sladderpresse, der afslørede Harvey Weinstein og “casting-couch”-kulturen. Og det er ikke den politiske presse, der udfordrer den politiske magt. De er en del af forretningsmodellen, de der sælger billetterne. Deres fokus er den gren, de selv sidder på.
På den måde kan man også se, hvem der har magten, nemlig dem, der ikke må kritiseres. Samtidig med, at magten automatisk arbejder på at få kontrol over pressen for at få kontrol over fortællingen, sker der automatisk en udskillelse af dissens, når konformiteten på når en kritisk masse. “[E]n nyhedsredaktion kan ikke have succes, hvis ikke der er sammenhæng og enighed” som NBC’s ledelse argumenterede, da de ombestemte sig og alligevel ikke ville have dissens i deres ekspertpanel.
Kodeord er ord som “deres”, “vores”, “vi”, som umiddelbart bruges som en fællesbetegnelse, men i virkeligheden er en gruppebetegnelse, som i os mod dem. Det er vores demokrati, ikke jeres, det er de anstændige borgerlige og ikke de uanstændige og vi mener i modsætning til jer. At samfundet består af alle borgere, hver med stemmeret, kan derfor virke ganske ophidsende, som det truer den mentale boble.
Valget af Donald Trump som præsident i 2016 var det ultimative chok. Medierne hoppede ukritisk med på løgnen om, at valget var undergravet af en uhellig alliance Trump og Ruslands Vladimir Putin og det var i det øjeblik, man tog 80’ernes udenrigspolitik til sig og gjorde Putin til tidens bøh-mand, ham der havde skaffet dem Trump på nakken. Da Robert Mueller III konkluderede at der ikke kunne etableres nogen forbindelse mellem Trump og Putin, som medierne havde foregøglet deres seere, lyttere og læsere, gav det ingen anledning til selvransagelse. New York Times daværende chefredaktør Dean Baquet konkluderede tværtimod “I think we covered that story better than anyone else” og, som Jeff Gerth syrligt tilføjer, så havde de endda en Pulitzer Pris som bevis.
Som om det ikke var nok, at historier bygget på rene fabrikationer, blev belønnet og fejret med, hvad der engang var den fineste journalistiske ære, så kammede nederlaget over i had og hævngerrighed. Som Biden indtog Det Hvide Hus i 2021, skrev hundredvis af forfattere, redaktører, journalister og andre publicister under på et åbent brev, der opfordrede til censur af alle, der havde deltaget i eller støttet Trumps regering.
We all love book publishing, but we have to be honest — our country is where it is in part because publishing has chased the money and notoriety of some pretty sketchy people, and has granted those same people both the imprimatur of respectability and a lot of money through sweetheart book deals.
As members of the writing and publishing community of the United States, we affirm that participation in the administration of Donald Trump must be considered a uniquely mitigating criterion for publishing houses when considering book deals.
Consequently, we believe: No participant in an administration that caged children, performed involuntary surgeries on captive women, and scoffed at science as millions were infected with a deadly virus should be enriched by the almost rote largesse of a big book deal. And no one who incited, suborned, instigated, or otherwise supported the January 6, 2021 coup attempt should have their philosophies remunerated and disseminated through our beloved publishing houses.
Fordi disse skribenter havde læst deres egne historier (jeg udtrykker min largesse ved ikke at affærdige dem som direkte ondsindede), troede de på, at Trump holdt børn i bure. Burene blev indført i forgængeren Barack Obamas regeringstid og var en metode til, med de begrænsede midler myndighederne havde, at kunne identificere de børn, som kom ledsaget af voksne, der kom illegalt, der farlige tur over grænsen fra Mexiko. For uhyggeligt nok var det langt fra altid, de voksne var i familie med børnene.
Ligeledes blev der ikke udført ‘ufrivillige indgreb på kvinder’ og selve ideen om, at Trumps regering fnysede af videnskaben under pandemien, er bizar. Ikke nok med at Trump allerede i januar 2020, under sin State of the Union tale, annoncerede, at der var en pandemi på vej fra Kina, og at hans regering allerede var i gang med at omstrukturere de relevante myndigheder for at kunne imødegå truslen, så satsede han og hans regering massivt på selve videnskaben, ved at lancere Operation Warp Speed, det program der lyn-udviklede vaccinerne.
At underskriverne dengang troede at optøjerne ved Capitol 6. januar var en opstand (insurrection), er ikke kun forskrækkelse over de voldsomme billeder og den dengang sparsomme kortlægning af begivenhederne. De er også resultatet af deres selvskabte boble, hvor Trumps tilhængere er en uniform hob af psykofanter. Ingen i boblen har påpeget den åbenlyse modsigelse, at det mest svært bevæbnede segment i USA, Trumps tilhængere, kørte til Washington DC for at vælte regeringen, men glemte alle deres våben. Ingen af deltagerne i optøjerne er her, snart tre år senere, blevet tiltalt, endsige dømt for at have deltaget i en opstand. En opstand uden opstandere.
Men det er styrken af den selvskabte boble, hvor man giver priser til hinandens fantasier. Som tyk hud, der sprækker, gør det derfor ondt, når boblen sprænges. Se på Demokraternes formand i Repræsentanternes Hus, som hun skoser en vært på MSNBC for ikke at holde partilinjen. Efter at have bildt seerne ind, at Biden har skabt 19 mio arbejdspladser, mens Trump tabte arbejdspladser, indskyder værten, at det skyldtes pandemien. Og den slags står ikke i manuskriptet
For at sætte det i relief, hvor chokerende en oplevelse det er for Nancy Pelosi, at opleve et modspil i tv, så kan man se MSNBCs Nicholle Wallace nedsmelte over udsigten til, at Trump genindtager Det Hvide Hus. “This time next year, I might not be sitting here!” siger hun afmægtigt, som var det ikke op til hendes arbejdsgiver at afgøre, hvor mange seere TV stationen kan blive ved med at bløde. I hendes indre er det Trumps stormtropper, der slæber af med hende i ly af natten. Wallaces syn på sig selv og pressens rolle afsløres umiddelbart efter som hun funderer videre; “There might not be a White House Correspondents Dinner or free press!”. Den årlige fejring af samspillet mellem magten og magtens vogtere er hendes opfattelse af demokrati.
Nu vi taler om faldende seertal og manglende tillid til medierne, så undrede det CNNs Acosta, at Trump står stærkt i meningsmålingerne, “which is extraordinary given the fact that a million people died of covid!”. Som Kanekoa The Great påpeger, så døde 600.000 af dem mens Biden var præsident og spekulerer: “Perhaps Acosta isn’t aware of this fact because CNN stopped reporting daily COVID deaths after Biden became President?” Og hvor vaccinerne fra Trump og Republikanerne var et tilbud, der kunne beskytte de ældre og dem med diverse komorbiditeter, blev vaccinerne i Demokraternes hænder, et middel til at tyrannisere alle til underkastelse.
“Do you remember how bad the media’s “Covid lab leak” – the hypothesis that the virus came from a lab – coverage was?” spørger Drew Holden og leverer en laaaang tråd, som er værd at se. Og MAZE supplerer med en lille vignet af mediernes dyrkelse af “Videnskaben” som autoritet og embedsmænd som dens ypperstepræster, man ikke måtte betvivle, selv om videnskab er netop det, at betvivle. Det er ikke sært, at tilliden til medier og politikere og eksperter falder.
Når magten hviler på mediernes tjenstvillighed gælder det selvfølgelig om at sikre den gren, som råddet breder sig. “New York is doling out ‘welfare’ for journalists as collapsing trust in state-controlled media is leading to an exodus of subscribers and plummeting ad rates” skriver Kyle Becker
The Empire State’s budget includes $90 million for tax credits against half of the first $50,000 of a journalist’s salary for qualifying local news outlets.
Thus, the state is using tax money to capture local news outlets through establishing government dependency.
“Provisions in the bill extend the benefits for outlets that have more than 100 employees and had major layoffs in the last five years,” the Washington Times reported. “The legislation, inserted into the $237 billion state budget, is so vague in its definition of ‘local’ that even some of the state’s marquee publications could qualify.”
Vent til han hører om den danske mediestøtte. I USA er der ikke et BBC eller en Danmarks Radio, der kan dominere mediebilledet og den offentlige debat. Men der er dog et offentligt finansieret medie i NPR, National Public Radio. Ikke overraskende har det altid lænet mod venstre i sin dækning, men det var ikke nok. I Trump årene skete der også her en skævvridning af en anden verden, hvor der blev luget kraftigt ud i de sidste divergerende røster. Derfor har det vakt opsigt at en af NPRs mangeårige journalister, Uri Berliner, i Free Press, skrev om, hvorledes hans førhen elskede arbejdsplads, var gået fra at være åben og nysgerrig i sin dækning til “the distilled worldview of a very small segment of the U.S. population”
Berliner passer ifølge ham selv på klicheen om den venstreorienterede journalist i et urbant “kystlinje-miljø”, helt ned til hans musikalske præferencer. Hans mor er oven i købet en lesbisk fredsaktivist, men selv om NPRs dækning havde en venstreorienteret slagside, var der en faglighed der dominerede arbejdet; “No image generated more pride within NPR than the farmer listening to Morning Edition from his or her tractor at sunrise”. Tjah, med udtryk som “his or her tractor”, er det måske ikke den repræsentative bondemand (eller kvinde), men meningen er til at forstå; saglighed og faglighed er for alle observanser.
Like many unfortunate things, the rise of advocacy took off with Donald Trump. As in many newsrooms, his election in 2016 was greeted at NPR with a mixture of disbelief, anger, and despair. (Just to note, I eagerly voted against Trump twice but felt we were obliged to cover him fairly.) But what began as tough, straightforward coverage of a belligerent, truth-impaired president veered toward efforts to damage or topple Trump’s presidency.
Persistent rumors that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia over the election became the catnip that drove reporting. At NPR, we hitched our wagon to Trump’s most visible antagonist, Representative Adam Schiff.
Schiff, who was the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, became NPR’s guiding hand, its ever-present muse. By my count, NPR hosts interviewed Schiff 25 times about Trump and Russia. During many of those conversations, Schiff alluded to purported evidence of collusion. The Schiff talking points became the drumbeat of NPR news reports.
But when the Mueller report found no credible evidence of collusion, NPR’s coverage was notably sparse. Russiagate quietly faded from our programming.
It is one thing to swing and miss on a major story. Unfortunately, it happens. You follow the wrong leads, you get misled by sources you trusted, you’re emotionally invested in a narrative, and bits of circumstantial evidence never add up. It’s bad to blow a big story.
What’s worse is to pretend it never happened, to move on with no mea culpas, no self-reflection. Especially when you expect high standards of transparency from public figures and institutions, but don’t practice those standards yourself. That’s what shatters trust and engenders cynicism about the media.
Russiagate was not NPR’s only miscue.
Joe Bidens søn Hunter Bidens bærbare computer, der indeholdt beviser på d’herrers korrupte virke, var den slags “stories that are not really stories” ifølge NPRs ledelse. At det amerikanske efterretningsvæsen løj for den amerikanske befolkning op til valget i 2020 og bildte vælgerne ind, at historien var russisk desinformation, var heller ikke relevant.
Ligeledes var diskussioner om, hvor og hvordan pandemien startede, teorien om at den var undsluppet et biologisk forskningscenter i Wuhan, udlagt som en racistisk og højreorienteret konspirationsteori. Ligeledes blev hele debatten om pandemien, virus og vacciner set igennem et ideologisk lys, som ovenfor beskrevet.
I 2019 blev John Lansing, der tidligere har været direktør for Voice of America(!), direktør for NPR. Voice of America er også et statsfinansieret medie, som har til formål, at forklare USAs position uden for USAs grænser, som den forstås gennem statsapparatets logik. Altså CIAs propaganda kanal. Og det betød, at opfattelsen af journalistik, der “lets evidence lead the way” blev ændret til noget ideologisk formålstjenstligt. Da hjemmerøveren og narkomanen George Floyd døde af sin overdosis, midt under en politiforretning var døren åbnet for en større mission
“When it comes to identifying and ending systemic racism,” Lansing wrote in a companywide article, “we can be agents of change. Listening and deep reflection are necessary but not enough. They must be followed by constructive and meaningful steps forward. I will hold myself accountable for this.”
And we were told that NPR itself was part of the problem. In confessional language he said the leaders of public media, “starting with me—must be aware of how we ourselves have benefited from white privilege in our careers. We must understand the unconscious bias we bring to our work and interactions. And we must commit ourselves—body and soul—to profound changes in ourselves and our institutions.”
He declared that diversity—on our staff and in our audience—was the overriding mission, the “North Star” of the organization. Phrases like “that’s part of the North Star” became part of meetings and more casual conversation.
Race and identity became paramount in nearly every aspect of the workplace. Journalists were required to ask everyone we interviewed their race, gender, and ethnicity (among other questions), and had to enter it in a centralized tracking system. We were given unconscious bias training sessions. A growing DEI staff offered regular meetings imploring us to “start talking about race.” Monthly dialogues were offered for “women of color” and “men of color.” Nonbinary people of color were included, too.
These initiatives, bolstered by a $1 million grant from the NPR Foundation, came from management, from the top down. Crucially, they were in sync culturally with what was happening at the grassroots—among producers, reporters, and other staffers. Most visible was a burgeoning number of employee resource (or affinity) groups based on identity.
De 87 redaktionelle stillinger i NPR er alle Demokrater. “Even if you’re a Democrat, you can’t think this is good.” sagde Bill Maher. Og så tilføjede han at den nye redaktør, var “the kind of white woman who says she is Beyonce’s spirit-animal”. NPR, har nemlig fået en ny redaktør, der til Mahers fortrydelse hedder Katharine Maher. Og det er lige som man forestiller sig det at gå fra asken til ilden. Jonathan Turley skriver at Maher fandt Berliners ord “profoundly disrespectful, hurtful, and demeaning”
In dismissing the criticism of bias, Maher adopted a spin common on law faculties where Republicans and conservatives have been largely purged. When confronted on the lack of ideological diversity, faculty often express disbelief that anyone would assume that they are biased simply because they continue to effectively bar republicans, libertarians, or conservatives.
Many also insist that there are more important forms of diversity than ideological or political perspectives. The result is the faculties today largely stretch from the left to the far left in terms of diversity.
Maher offered a similar spin while suggesting (falsely) that Berliner was somehow opposed to a diverse workplace:
“It is deeply simplistic to assert that the diversity of America can be reduced to any particular set of beliefs, and faulty reasoning to infer that identity is determinative of one’s thoughts or political leanings. Each of our colleagues are here because they are excellent, accomplished professionals with an intense commitment to our work: we are stronger because of the work we do together, and we owe each other our utmost respect. We fulfill our mission best when we look and sound like the country we serve.”
(…)
Shannon Thaler at the New York Post reassembled Maher’s deleted postings including a 2018 declaration that “Donald Trump is a racist” and a variety of race-based commentary. That included a statement that appeared to excuse looting.
She is also quoted for saying that “white silence is complicity.” She has described her own “hysteric white woman voice.” She further stated: “I was taught to do it. I’ve done it. It’s a disturbing recognition. While I don’t recall ever using it to deliberately expose another person to immediate physical harm on my own cognizance, it’s not impossible. That is whiteness.”
She further stated “I grew up feeling superior (hah, how white of me) because I was from New England and my part of the country didn’t have slaves, or so I’d been taught.”
MONOKULTUR 
Skriv en kommentar