In a recent move, the White House Press Secretary opened the briefing room doors to representatives of ‘new media’, including podcasters and web publishers, acknowledging their growing influence and impact. This move was notable, as it reflected a pattern that was prominent during the last election cycle, where the former President made himself readily accessible to these emerging outlets, whilst traditional press outlets were largely bypassed. It’s clear that a shift is occurring; the ‘legacy’ press is on the backfoot, while its newer counterparts are gaining momentum. The underpinnings of this development stems largely from a widespread erosion of public trust in established media, spurred by perceived bias within the print and broadcast giants.
It’s difficult to miss the telltale signs of this decline. A celebrated anchor for the program ‘Meet the Press’, has stepped down, deciding to vacate their chair after years of service. In another case, a distinguished newspaper columnist resigned from the editorial board in order to focus on her individual write-ups. However, even these moves couldn’t halt the continual financial losses that the newspaper sustains.
Extend the lens a bit wider, and the picture is similar. On the popular television show ‘The View’, the host revealed her political inclinations so there is no mistaking where she stands. By contrast, a conservative news outlet reported that, while biased mainstream media outlets began the week scrutinizing the former President’s cabinet and his administration, they’ve barely glanced at the questionable dealings of the present administration.
We’ve seen in other times of cultural and societal shift, certain factions trying to hold back the tide. Prominently, the resistance to civil rights regulations intended to shield minorities from bias comes as a notable instance. However, numerous other examples could be cited where those resistant to change found themselves being gradually left behind.
This phenomenon seems to be consistent with the trajectory of legacy media. Many of these establishments appear unable to engage in self-evaluation or to vary their entrenched ideological stances. Their notion is that consumers of news content should simply accept whatever they produce, irrespective of quality or fairness.
This does not suggest that the job of media is to refrain from questioning the governance, statements, or actions of a sitting president or an administration. On the contrary, their role necessitates critical examination and exposure of any discord or lapses. However, this criticism should not default to a mindset of ‘nothing right can ever be accomplished’.
The standard protocol currently seems to be that when the former administration or any republicans managed a winning approach, those achievements were cursorily acknowledged, merely to be discarded and replaced with fresh rounds of cynical interrogation.
At this point, it may be too late for legacy media to regain its lost credibility and status. With many within their ranks inclined towards a partisan stance, the odds of redefining their brand look bleak. If they find themselves struggling to survive, the blame lies squarely on their own shoulders.
It’s important to underscore the significance of a free press to a strong America. The emergence of new media – fair, balanced, and diligent – may just be what the realm of journalism needs for its resurgence and survival.