A Somewhat Happy Marriage: Journalism and History

I am a student of history, a history major, first and foremost, so I understand the complex relationship between journalism and history. I’ve used newspapers many times to tell the story of the past.

As Professor Follis noted early in the class, journalism is history as it happens. Journalism is a reflection of the past, and a gateway to it. When historians look to examine life as it happened, 30, 80, 200 years ago, their first stop is often a newspaper. Where the relationship is faulty, as we know, is that the press hasn’t always been a responsible entity. The press was often biased, manipulative, and hateful. It represented the worst in society – pro-slavery, anti-Semitism, war fanaticism.

Ultimately, it is up to journalists in the moment to reflect the needs of the people, and to fight for what is right. Of course, if they are corrupted, for whatever reason, it is the role of historians to differentiate between the good, the bad, the lies, and the truth.

When I saw the extra credit option to see this movie, I was pretty excited, mostly because I had just watched the movie right after we had that lesson – I saw it on my HBO and had to give it a watch.

As a big fan of 1970s drama, and Dustin Hoffman, I was excited to watch it. I enjoyed the movies display of journalism long before email and the internet. Seeing how the whole Watergate scandal happen from the eyes of the journalists that made it happen was also very interesting. In history class, we always discuss the missing minutes of tape and the drama that unfolded after the case was wide open, but rarely of the fine work of Bernstein and Woodward (who I was able to see on campus here, last year).

Though, I will say that the ending came quick, and the story escalated at the very end. I would have hoped some time went into the months prior to the resignation, as opposed to just the machine telling us…but I also understand because of the nature of time in a movie, and the focus on the journalist’s investigation.

Journalism Helps Demagogues

Whether it is Father Coughlin in the 1930s, Joe McCarthy in the 1950s, or Donald Trump in 2016, journalism and the news business certainly plays a role in the proliferation of populism, and potential demagogues. These hot head’s words steal the show from the competition or even those trying to expose their libel and slander.

The facts are clear – historians like Rodger Streitmatter can point to the power of money or the journalistic bias as the culprit behind the spread of Coughlin’s Antisemitism or McCarthy’s Red Scare. Researchers today can prove that the journalistic bias had an arresting influence on the nomination of Donald Trump. Trump’s abundant presence on TV without doubt positively impacted his campaign.

Trump’s campaign, his wild comments, and combative tone made his assault on Washington and his competition good television news.

The business of journalism, their desire to compete with other networks and papers – let alone the whole new world of the internet – forces publishers to try and capture the “60 Minutes Moment.”

Journalism needs to rise above the squabble of fake-news cites, the harmful polarized shows like Hannity and Rachel Maddow, and report the facts, fairly. Report the policy, fairly. Discuss the policy, fairly. And ultimately, they must work to inform and help promote causes and ideals that all Americans, Democrat, Republican, need to hear and understand. They should not work to air all of the fluff and flagrant lies of one candidate to satisfy the needs of a few corporate billionaires that control our nation’s journalism. Otherwise, our democracy will continue to be at risk.

This week, the New York Times, ran a story about the lack of menstrual supplies available to women in prisons in New York City and across New York state. The key highlight is that the jails have the supplies, but the lack of policy leaves their distribution to up to abuse.

In the report, journalist Zoe Greenberg dives deep into the jail cells and lives of women incarcerated in New York. She interviews women who were in jails like the infamous Rickers Island in the Bronx.

Though her story has some figures based on surveys, it focuses on the anecdotes of women feeling humiliated without the proper care, forced to beg for tampons, and even using menstrual supplies as currency worth more than sugar or cigarettes.

The investigation also reached out to activists and city and state officials for comments. When questioned, one official noted that in three years there has been no grievances filed related to menstrual hygiene – contradictory to the stories that Greenberg shares.

Though she notes some efforts have been made in recent years, and the New York Times investigation has prompted new reviews, ultimately little has been accomplished to provide the proper care that female inmates need – the issue being more about power over an inmate than the lack of resources.

Today, the Vermont House of Representatives passed a law to protect the privacy of a journalist’s source. The bill is expected to be signed by Governor Phil Scott.

Cory Dawson, writing for the Associated Press, reports that it passed by a vote of 140-2 in the House, and unanimously in the Senate last month. The bill allows journalist to keep their sources confidential, even if subpoenaed, much like the relationship between doctors and patients.

The bill passed, in-part because of intense pushing by journalists throughout the state who “became temporary lobbyists to help get the law through, putting them in an uncomfortable position.” The journalists didn’t like pushing for a specific issue, but knew they had to fight this time. The concept of a shield law in Vermont gained notoriety, as reporters were forced to release information (they didn’t have to, as the case eventually fell apart) they had gathered about a then-senator’s sex crimes.

What about the two that voted ‘no?’ Rep. Bob Frenier, one of the two nay-sayers, voted so because he worried that the law too narrowly defined a free press.

It would seem that the boxing match over the Illinois state budget has moved out of the Springfield ring and is on the road.

With the Senate on break, and Rauner conducting a whistle-stop ‘pass-a-budget’ tour across the state (he was in Champaign just yesterday), it would seem that the bitter fight to fund the state will go on.

The News-Gazette is calling them out in a new editorial, “failure across the board.” They, like many papers and most Illinoisans, are calling (again and again) for an end of the budget stalemate that has gone on for nearly two years.

In this editorial, where they call out both sides, they are asking for a budget as “a first step toward putting the ship of state back on a proper course.” They go on to push for steps to build Illinois’ economy and to increase taxes to overcome Illinois’ financial shortcomings.

They close by framing the fight between Madigan’s tax increases and Rauner’s larger agenda. Yet, it is more than that, both sides must come together beyond their policy differences, stop “pointing fingers,” and get to work to fix the state.

After public defending Fox News host Bill O’Reilly from sexual harassment claims on Wednesday, President Trump came under fire from Twitter, reports Emily Steel and Michael S. Schmidt of The New York Times.  President Trump, famous for his inflammatory use of Twitter, was criticized by one of Mr. O’Reilly’s accusers, Rebecca Gomez Diamond, a former Fox News contributor.

Both President Trump’s defense and Ms. Gomez Diamond’s response came just days after The Times ran an earlier story about $13 million worth of settlements being paid to Ms. Gomez Diamond and four other women.

In the series of Tweets, Ms. Gomez Diamond (@gogodiamond) defends her credibility as an accuser, the suit itself, and the choice to settle. Her sharpest rebuke of President Trump’s comments shows her raw emotion: “@POTUS I’m saddened reading your comments. Truly disappointed and vilified all over again. Such comments tell women they won’t be believed.”

According to The Times report, Mr. O’Reilly continues to claim no wrongdoing, and Fox News defended their process and stance on the issue. Due to the report, over 30 companies have pulled ads from The O’Reilly Factor.

The March 30, 2017 NBC Nightly News broadcast featured several stories, each showcasing at least one news value. The program’s ‘news,’ tended to focus on more dramatic values. Conflict and emotion is at that the center of the more important stories, and draws the viewer’s attention quickly (if it bleeds, it leads). Each story involves a person or issue of prominence, has a significant impact nation-wide, and is currently evolving or will evolve more over time.

To build on the point that conflict and impact at the core of the broadcast, the lead story was focused on investigations into the Trump administration. This took up a full quarter of the broadcast. This story featured timeliness (citing a New York Times article published today), impact (this information may lead to major shifts in Washington), prominence (it features President Trump), conflict (there’s a growing battle over this issue) and currency (this is an ongoing interest).

Other news stories focused on conflict (a division in the Republican Party, a close vote on abortion in the Senate, repeal of the ‘Bathroom Bill’ in North Carolina), emotion (the tragic church bus crash), impact (the rise of pedestrian deaths), human interest (a heartfelt “Inspiring America” report), and even proximity (severe weather is impacting a huge swath of the nation).

Look at my blog! It’s for Journalism 200! Woo!