There exists in television and movie drama a group of people called “journalists”. They are often seen as a swarming pack asking nasty questions of leaders, often yelling to gain attention. In one episode of Bosch that I watched, the character Scott Anderson, journalist for (I presume) the LA Times, is not in any way reined in and is allowed to investigate anyone of his choosing in the LA power structure. He sneaks around, burrows, sets traps, publishes articles that powerful people do not like. He’s a pain in the ass.
Such nonsense. No respected newspaper would allow such behavior. Journalists are assigned beats and supervised by editors (long disarmed, perhaps never armed at all) and publishers who mind the store for the wealthiest and most powerful members of the community. Journalism is not like that at all – it is part of the power structure, and not in any way its antithesis. And yeah, I remember Watergate. It was like that then too, which means that readers need to examine what really happened there, not that readers here suffer any delusions.
David Crisp is a journalist who spent much of his career in my home town of Billings, Montana. He is currently 75 years of age. He spent that career in the newspaper business, and from 1997-2016 published the Billings Outpost, a small newspaper. As I knew him, David prided himself on his profession, and professionalism. Honestly, I liked the man even as he left for public record the following comments on this blog:
2008: One reason journalists may seem “haughty” is that so much of the criticism is so incredibly stupid. That makes it hard to focus on the criticism that really should be heeded.
2008: [After I criticized the late Tim Russert]: Even by your standards, this is an awfully graceless post. It’s a relief to know that I will never have to read your posthumous critique of my own journalistic shortcomings.
2009: [After I impulsively deleted one of his comments, and then asked him to repost] I think I said that if you took Mark Tokarski, Noam Chomsky and a thimble, you would find more useful information about journalism in the thimble than in the other two combined. Now delete that, you piece of shit.
2009: Fuck you.
2010: Stay off my website, you jerk.
David is still alive, dammit, so this is not posthumous. I was quite surprised to find he had left those comments here in my archive, and I can see I got under his skin. The reason I bring him up is part of a piece he wrote on the death of a fellow journalist wherein he offered high praise for him, saying (and I cannot quote but remember it in essence) that he never knew in all his years as a journalist what his dead friend’s personal political opinions might be.
This is not about Mr. Crisp, specifically, but rather about journalism in general. As degrees go, I am told that one in journalism is one of the easiest to attain. David Barsamian, Noam Chomsky’s Minime, called them “Stenographers to Power”. Journalist Ben Bagdikian (1920-2016), a lifelong critic of journalism, wrote in one of his books about the essential training of a journalist, allegorically, wherein a fresh-behind-the-ears young man goes to work for a newspaper, and is systematically degraded by rejection by his editor into what becomes absence of fresh thoughts and new ideas. He takes his place alongside the others as a man without curiosity. Awards will surely follow.
I wondered about Crisp’s giving his deceased friend such high praise for either not having, or not voicing personal opinions. Maybe that’s why David said “Fuck you” to me, though I think that comment was more intended as specific criticism of me as a person. It is a legitimate expression of opinion, so David does have them. He didn’t/doesn’t like me. He could have easily struck back in public by attacking my profession, accounting, but the problem there is that I would not mind, might even join in if I cared at all. I only did it to make a living, and never thought of it as a religion. Must we all place our need for paychecks before our personal integrity? (Pretty much … yes, that is what we must do.)
In the post immediately previous, I noted that Catholics used their “Searches” as brainwashing tools, and further that doctors in training are usually sleep-deprived, and so too might suffer brainwashing. I extend that now to the profession of journalism even as they don’t have to work as hard as doctors to get accredited.
What happens to a person who never expresses an opinion? It is considered a rule of integrity in the profession of journalism to stand back, gather the words of others, quote them correctly, and then move on to the next story. I suspect a couple of possibilities here: One, that the selection process for journalists tends to choose people of low curiosity. The other is the on-the-job training as noted by Bagdikian, wherein natural curiosity is bludgeoned, teaches them to avoid getting personally involved in stories. This can only be expressed as or lead to lack of curiosity.
If all of that is necessary to be a journalist, then I suggest that being a journalist is not something either desirable or honorable. Rather it is like me sitting at holiday dinners with my family and saying nary a word of my personal philosophies or opinions, knowing that eyes will dart and one or two of them might erupt in anger. I’ve been trained that way. I could be the family journalist!
This I know for a fact: Mr. Crisp has been chosen to moderate debates among political candidates, considered a high honor. It’s been years, perhaps decades, since I watched a presidential debate, but I do remember one in which questions were taken from the audience … except … questions had to be written and then selected to be read, meaning that no burrowing insightful questioning would be allowed. The audience was expected to behave like journalists, and never disrespect anyone standing behind a podium. I know Mr. Crisp fulfilled that role with honor and integrity and never once left the script and ventured into true questioning of a candidates worthiness. He just shut up and asked the stupid questions and waited for the windy response to end so he could ask another. That’s how it is done, professionally, by professional journalists.
At our family gatherings any mention of politics will, in one or two of them, cause raised voices and expressions of disgust, usually about this guy named “Trump”. There is genuine angst. Just recently I expressed my own opinion to one in hushed voice as follows: “I don’t know. I don’t vote.” I am also tempted to say that if voting mattered, it would be illegal. But the words get stuck in my throat.
So I get it! I understand journalism and journalists. They live, as I do, in fear. (My family does not read my blog.)
Piece of Mindful 
I had dinner with an old friend of the family a few days ago. He said his daughter recently got a degree in journalism from Emerson University, a well-respected school in Boston (no comment on whether respect is deserved or not). Immediately i braced for the follow up to that – “and she is not working in journalism because she hates politics”. Sounded about right. At present if you are a journalist you are reduced to being a professional wrestling fan, bitching that the heel, Trump, has won his matches, and we need a hero to come and knock him out of the ring.
LikeLike
As you imply Mark, journalists are then simply parrots, sitting around listening to what is being said, and squawking back what they heard. Which is what most people seem to be these days, parrots bleating out what they heard on the news like a big shot authority of everything. My step-mother, an intelligent women, makes sure to check the news every morning as if it were an essential part of staying health by providing nourishing information for your day.
LikeLike
Mark, In reference to you choosing not to vote, I live in Australia and we have compulsory voting. If we do not vote, and I have not at times, we are fined substantial sums as well as having all items like driving licenses and such unable to be renewed unless the fines are immediately paid. We actually do not need to vote because, on attendance at a voting booth, we have our names marked off on the electoral roll then go to the booth to vote. We can just drop the voting forms in the box leaving them blank, however, we must attend or pay the price. Think yourself lucky that you live in a relatively free society where you have constitutional rights. We do not. This was great when we had responsible government and a well educated population. Following the changes in the 1970’s, we have lost any association to a free society and now live in the prison continent we started with. Unfortunately, we cannot get the people to understand what has been lost because of an education system totally controlled to indoctrinate children into a world without individual rights. Thanks for sharing your opinions with us.
LikeLike
Nice comment, very insightful. I noticed with Australia that the Covid restrictions were extremely harsh, but so were they here too in our relatively free land. I was able to avoid them because I live in a rural area where enforcement was neglected. I mostly ignored them, never locking down and rarely wearing a mask. I am curious about Australia, but have no inclination to visit due to what I saw with Covid, where I might be stranded there on the whim of some stupid bureaucrat masquerading as a medical “expert”, a word I hate. But don’t be too jealous of the USA, as the velvet glove quickly hit the trash can on 3/11 (=33] 2020.
LikeLike
Yes Mark, the COVID restrictions here were extremely harsh. In fact, due to the harassment by corrupt police in the city, we had to move to a tiny little town in the outback to get away. After having car windows smashed, house broken into, house windows smashed, armed cops dragging my family away at 2am on Christmas morning, 3 months imprisonment before a trial where the charges were thrown out, we could take no more. So, then the fake COVID bullshit came along and we were very wary of getting an untested, experimental drug injected. Particularly after my wife suffered ongoing illness due to getting the flu shot years ago. So, of course, even in this country town we were ostracised for not getting the jab. My wife was banned from the school where our granddaughter attended, our son lost his job, and we were not allowed into shops or the pub as we would not wear masks. My wife even got an exemption. Anyone who protested in the cities were shot by dirty coppers using rubber bullets. Not a nice time! It saddens me that friends and family members have been diagnosed with severe illness such as cancers since. Some have since passed away even though they were in remission prior to the jab. Unfortunately, as you’re aware, once you know you can’t go back. Even more concerning these days is the ever increasing geoengineering where we observe aircraft, drones and other equipment spraying the skies, radar, microwaves etc modifying the weather causing floods and damage to the environment in their efforts to reduce “global warming”. This once friendly and warm society has become cold and distant with crime exploding everywhere. But wait, the government has introduced an amnesty on machetes. So they have set up special bins for parents to encourage their kids to drop their machetes into before they ban machetes outright. We, as you may know had to hand all our guns in after the Pt. Arthur psyop. Now we have to give up our machetes too! Not that I own one but hey, I may need to chop some jungle down one day. Apparently, in the city the newly arrived citizens use them to chop each others arms off. Kids these days! Even more concerning is our government wants to tax unrealised gains. So, if you might make some money selling something, the government will tax you on it before you do. It costs a lot to govern these days, I hear. But, in typical Aussie style, as long as we’ve got a long weekend and an Esky full of cold beer, she’ll be right mate!
LikeLike
Good Lord! You and your family are in prison!
LikeLike
Sorry I got a bit off topic there. But it was Saturday night after a nice bottle of Shiraz and a few glasses of a well-aged tawny port. Cheers.
LikeLike
No need to explain. I never understood “Chiraz”, by the way. I could never distinguish one wine from another. I only knew white good, red bad, cold good, warm bad.
LikeLike
I thought I should explain why my family was harassed by the cops.
Several years ago, I accepted a role in a Pacific Islands town to teach local teenagers how to become Automotive Technicians. The teaching experience was rewarding—students were eager to learn and their families made significant sacrifices for their education
Unlike in Australia, where apprentices can sometimes be indifferent, these young men were highly motivated and dedicated. I connected with the trainees through shared interests, particularly music, and adapted my teaching to keep them engaged. Introducing them to genres like the Blues created a strong cultural connection and mutual respect.
While my work was fulfilling, I soon became aware of serious issues within the local system. Racism, abuse of white privilege, and widespread corruption were prevalent, affecting both the trainees and the broader community. The waste, inefficiency and contempt for the locals had to be seen to be believed.
As an employee contracted by an Australian government organisation, I felt a duty to report these issues. I collected evidence and documented the corruption, then composed a formal letter to the relevant Minister, copying in the Prime Minister as well.
After submitting my report, my family and I experienced harassment from local police. This harassment was likely a direct response to my whistleblowing activities and efforts to expose the corruption.
My commitment to integrity and the wellbeing of the trainees led me to take a stand against corruption. Unfortunately, this resulted in significant personal consequences, including the harassment of my family by local authorities as well as substantial financial loss.
While I did pursue a redress through the system, it became obvious that the system is as corrupt as everything else.
In relation to the money that goes to Foreign Aid, I calculated that less than 10% actually gets to those who need it. (Possibly closer to 1% in reality.)
Following a visit to the region by the Minister, I was charged and dismissed. My visa was cancelled, I had no income, nowhere to live and no tickets home. All that had to come out of my savings. Historically, Aussies in trouble in another country are abandoned. (e.g. Julian Assange)
However, I remain proud of the positive impact made during my time teaching on the island and the stand I took for justice and transparency.
LikeLike
Jon, i had a friend from India, whom I used to hike with a lot, who thought compulsory voting in the USA would solve all our problems. Completely ridiculous of course. As are other proposals, like I have heard my dad propose, that only “literate” people that can pass some test should be allowed to vote. Another suggestion that fixes nothing.
LikeLike
Thanks mate, but during my time as a political insider and ever since, I have become aware that the voting system, like pretty much everything else is fixed. In terms of those who choose to rule over us, nothing is left to chance. Plans are put in place decades in advance and people they choose are put in the positions where they can be manipulated as well as manipulate the population. In other words, our vote is worthless. The only thing that can now change this world is if the people rise up and take over. Not going to happen. So, we live as if at war, everything is fair in love and War, apparently. Even though we have lost the war, we continue to resist as best we can.
LikeLike
I participated in a candidate’s course for one of the major political parties in Oz once in my persona of the angry young man.
We had a journo come in to train us on how to deal with the media. He asked us one at a time as to the reason we wanted to become politicians.
When it be
came to my turn to answer, in my naievity, I replied that it was because I wanted to do good things for my country.
Later on, after we had all given our responses, he stated in front of us all that “anyone who goes into politics to do good work for their country is nothing but a pompous arse.”
At the time, I thought he was being an arsehole himself, but I came to realise that he was supremely aware of the game of politics and that he was letting me know. The only journo I’ve ever known to have spoken real truth!
LikeLike
I don’t know, it seems like the pompous ass would be the ones who make a big show of mouthing all the platitudes or high minded ideals, without believing a word of it.. but maybe he meant it in the sense of “tilting at windmills”..
LikeLike
It’s an interesting anecdote though.. were you the only newbie in the room I wonder, and he sussed that out.. It seems odd otherwise he would go that cynical. I’m sure there are lots of idealists at low levels of politics and they just don’t advance unless they become more cynical or self-interested. It seems brazen to just come right out with that level of cynicism in an audience of low level wannabe politicos.. like on your first day, and you’re already walking right into the smike-filled room of legend where they cut all the deals.. ha
LikeLike
As the course went on, it became very clear that certain participants in the candidate’s course were being favoured, i.e. being given special attention. At the next election, it was these people who had been selected for seats which were certainties. These people, once elected were then promoted very quickly to high profile positions. It was just another incident which led me to believe after seeing much more evidence, that all elections are rigged. No election is left to the voters to decide. In my opinion, the journo who made the comment was fully aware of how everything works and had become very cynical. Perhaps, he was also warning us that we really had no chance as he knew who he had to personally favour and ensure they shone on the course. It doesn’t really matter now. The reality is that everything is rigged. You know, it’s a big club, but we ain’t in it! 😭
LikeLike
politicians are selected, not elected, votes are not counted. Took me a long time to grasp that. However, it is of extreme importance for people in power that we imagine it is all real. Otherwise the house of cards collapses.
Same with money.
LikeLike
A LONG time ago I fancied I might want to get involved in politics, at the local level first. I thought because I was clever, and learned in history and other diverse topics, with an easygoing personality, that I could run for office. Some of my relatives and neighbors had been on town council, or elected to office.
8 years ago I moved to a small town with a “representative” democracy, meaning town meetings where all residents are invited to the annual town meeting to debate and vote on the proposals. I went the first two years, and even though the town only has about 7000 residents, I realized at the town level politics were rigged. Why? Because every proposal that came up to vote passed. And how do you create proposals? I won’t go into details but that is all done by elected, or not elected officials, long before the meeting, with only people showing up to rubberstamp it. What really irritated me was the $50 million we had to spend for a new elementary school, to replace a school built in the late 1980s that looked fine. Because of course due to regulations it would be too expensive to refurbish. And so I realized even at the lowest levels the individual has almost zero ability to change anything in government, without massive time or effort, that would be almost always be time wasted, unless you are in politics and profiting from it.
LikeLike
Yes, you’ve got it Mark. However, in my opinion, the house of cards with money as well, is already in the very early stages of collapse. Whether this is intentional or not I’m still unsure. My opinion is that it is intentional but was supposed to happen via other less obvious means. I see the dumbos running things and they have shit for brains. The dumbing down of humanity has affected the ruling class too. That was unintended but it’s human nature that we are all reduced to the lowest common denominator. Individuality and self awareness, duty to others, common sense etc are no longer allowed let alone encouraged. This has led to the breaking down of civilised living as cultures working together towards common goals of benefit to all humanity. Nobody knows what is the right way anymore, and nobody believes in anything anymore. A reset is most certainly on the cards but not a positive one for the future. Unless we can wake people up to change it. How to do that is the conundrum.
LikeLike
Compulsory voting? My attitude was forming, but then elevated and frozen in place by watching video of people storming into Walmart when it opened one morning on Black Friday.
Honestly, I suspect they don’t count votes at any level, but I cannot be sure. I need to read Lippman, in his book Public Opinion (1922)* where he wrote about the role of the public in public affairs. My emotions, once mixed, are now firm, that voting is a ritual we need to exercise just to allow people to think their opinion matters, but never to be be taken seriously.
*Good idea! I am searching for reading material.
LikeLike
I’ll recommend again Life: the Movie by Neal Gabler.. Lippmann is probably in his bibliography. It accepts news stories as real, maybe as a practical publishing matter, but is highly aware of PR and illusion in general. From a review –
“As he charts the history of high vs. popular culture, Gabler makes a telling point. It isn’t just about high brow and low brow – it’s about the ascendency of entertainment. Being entertained is easy, and the corollary is that when the goal is entertainment, grabbing and holding audience attention is the supreme value, and “things that do not conform – for example, serious literature, serious political debate, serious ideas, serious anything – are more likely to be compromised or marginalized than ever before.”
Life: the Movie is a complex and disturbing book. Gabler says in the introduction, it is diagnostic and not prescriptive. To offer easy answers, he says, would be like the movie illusion where we meet the monster in act one and see it vanquished in act three. Writing 12 years ago, Gabler said:
“One is almost compelled to admit that turning life into escapist entertainment is a perversely ingenious adaptation to the turbulence and tumult of modern existence. Why worry about the seemingly intractable problems of society when you can simply declare ‘It’s morning in America,” as President Reagan did in his 1984 reelection campaign, and have yourself a long-running Frank Capra movie right down to the aw-shucks hero?”
LikeLike
OK, just ordered it, and thank you.
LikeLike
Very perceptive comments, there has been some interesting discussion past few days.
I had a very similar thought just today, about how many people fritter away their free time watching Netflix. So in my town we have a great old New England general store, that I go to get breakfast on the weekends. Lots of cyclists come in, and it’s great to see how many people in their 50-70s are out cycling and in good shape, it seems like at least in the Boston area there are a lot of people exercising and enjoying the outdoors.
However whenever I hear people talk, or talk to adults, they are recommending I watch some series on Netflix. I really try hard not to watch TV, except old comedies for an hour a day at most. And peoples perceptions of reality are heavily influenced by these shows, if you ask them is it fiction or non-fiction, many will say “oh it’s based on a true story”, so it’s just embellished junk entertainment masquerading as non-fiction. Of course the whole way Hollywood recreates history and sells it as actual events is very subversive, and the way most people understand history.
LikeLike
I watched “The Dig” on Netfix, I hesitate to confess. It’s about an archeological find in England in the 1930s. Then I read some reviews.
LikeLike
Mark, don’t get your comment. The list 1-4, is that your reviews or are you quoting? What do you mean by then you read some reviews?
LikeLike
You mentioned people talking about Netflix movies, and I saw one I liked. So I read reviews and then reviewed it myself. I thought the romance was unnecessary, and the getting ready for German attacks to be war propaganda. Otherwise, nice movie. I liked that they did not take the woman archeologist and make her into a genius held down by males.
LikeLike
I did think “What the hell is she doing out of the kitchen?!”
LikeLike
Great! I hope you enjoy it. Written in the mid 90s and media has changed a lot, but the larger ideas should still be relevant.
LikeLike
This goes way back with me … my last vote cast for president was for Reagan. I believed the actor’s public image. I subscribed to newspapers up until 2010 or so, when the Denver Post was the only menu item. We dropped them, but one day as I plowed my driveway my snow thrower got jammed up with paper. The Post people had placed their Sunday advertising supplement at the base of everyone’s driveway that day, including for non subscribers like me. Then it snowed. It took an hour to clean it up, and I was furious. I spoke to someone there and asked “Did you think we were not getting enough advertising?” They never pulled that stunt again.
Power infiltrates what is called education … it happened in medicine, where germ theory took hold even as many thought it wrong and Pasteur a fraud. They had intelligent purpose, the ones who took over education of doctors, that now manifests in them being drug and vaccine pushers. They are good at fixing things that break, and wounds and the like, but if you get cancer they don’t know why and it will kill you. They have no idea about things like polio or how toxins affect us, and cannot even tell us why we get colds, insisting it is all viruses never proven to exist.
The same thing happened with journalism, education infiltrated by power, and done with extreme intelligence. The news professionals that emerged last century were taught not to think, and to be proud of it, making it their masthead. Quote accurately, never burrow, never allow emotion or even natural curiosity interfere with objectivity. It is that last word, objectivity, that defines them, and is their undoing. It prevents thinking, and spares them ever having to be confrontational.
LikeLike
In the UK then, journalists are a virtually extinct breed. All the once independent local rags have been swept up into a few corporations. Certainly the ones that I used to read. At the national level then, they all churn out agency pieces, some “journalist” may tweak a few things for the publication but the uniformity is very obvious. Same stories, similar words, sometimes given their slant by one of their incurious hacks
The BBC [the British State Propaganda Service] is one of the worst now. Their website seems to be staffed by functionally illiterate cretins. However it has the advantage that some of their articles are, unintentionally, absolutely hilarious. Such illogical guff, like Nuclear Reactors on the moon, all reported with a straight face. I refuse to look at their output in any form other than the website. I hardly ever look at the full report either, just glance at the headlines to give myself a good belly laugh and to keep up with the latest psyops
This has the advantage that, because I never watch their TV programs then, I can make a simple declaration and avoid paying their “Licence Fee”. Which is obligatory for EVERY household here, approx $200 per annum. I used to pay it before the opt out became available. It used to stick in my craw too, I hated paying for them to propagandise me
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pete, journalists are human, like all of us, and often fail at what they do, like all of us. My biggest objection to them, which comes across in the Crisp comment where he says
is that it is not unusual for them to come across as David does here, as smug. He thinks his craft is too important and complex for us to understand, as if his avoidance of personal opinions is some sort of merit badge. I don’t think that it is possible to understand a person or a topic and at the same time remain neutral and incurious. The brain has to be engaged at some point, and opinions must form. That news outlets don’t allow opinions is a cover, for as we Americans know or should know, news outlets like PBS and NPR, CBS and NBC and ABC CNN and and Fox are heavily biased but, in general, report the same news with a mere bit of tailoring to suit their particular audience. NPR/PBS will enhance it to appeal to their woke/liberal people, Fox to their more conservative base, but it is the same news. Since they all agree at all times on what is news, it is not hard to see that it comes from a common source.
LikeLike
Mark, good point that they all follow the exact same script. And they are “allowed” to show an opinion, as long as it fits somewhere within the narrow confines of political parties and acceptable topics. Not allowed to question the veracity of a public official, scientist, or so called facts of course. And of course they are always all rah rah about Patriotism, and love of country and democracy, ad naseum.
LikeLike
If you want a journalist that doesn’t follow the script, look up James O’Keefe!
LikeLiked by 1 person