Kathrine Nero
For generations, we learned about our political candidates and issues through traditional media: print, television and radio. Except for in-person campaign events or opinions of others, the flow of information went almost exclusively through media. Rules were in place to make sure candidates had equal time, and that scripts and stories were written without opinion, unless clearly identified. Online media began in much the same way, but the blurred lines between news and opinion, and more importantly, between news curated and produced by professionals – and news curated and produced by us – has changed not only our opinions, but the way we learn about politics altogether.
The Reese’s Puffs Theory
My college roommate was never allowed to have sugary cereals when she lived with her parents. The second we moved into a house off campus and started buying our own groceries, she immediately picked up Reese’s Puffs cereal. She ate it for at least two meals a day and loved every minute of it.
This is much the same way we curate our own news feed these days. Reese’s Puffs are fine in moderation, but we all know you need to mix in a few vegetables every now and then. Similarly, we may find ourselves drawn to news we like, to sites that publish stories we agree with, and shying away from opinions and issues we don’t like or care about.
I call it the Reese’s Puffs Theory. Just because we like it doesn’t mean it’s good for us. We need vegetables for a well-rounded diet. And for a balanced news diet, we need to ingest information that tells the full story, not just the parts we like.
Hello in there … (in there … in there …)
Curating a news political feed feeds the beast, so to speak. It creates an echo chamber where we keep hearing the same information over and over, confirming our belief in it time and again. It makes the consumer think “everyone’s talking about this” or “I hear this everywhere,” when really, we’re choosing only a few outlets to fill our feed, and the same stories get repeated over and over again. And clickbait is the name of the game in much of social media, so sensationalized stories get boiled down to their most inflammatory headlines. This can make stories rooted in truth seem bigger and bolder – and sometimes, just plain wrong.
The onslaught of 24-hour news networks have also forced newsrooms to find something to fill all that time. Repetition, even of verifiable stories, can make them seem more important than they are, leading us back into the echo chamber, reinforcing headlines over depth.
It’s not just TV and newspapers anymore
The sea of political messages is also an issue for voters searching for answers. What used to be only on television, newspaper and radio is decentralized. You’ll see it on social media, YouTube and other digital platforms. “News” can be created by anyone and many times, have no checks and balances to make sure they are factually accurate and objective.
That’s not to say all online media is one-sided; there are plenty of news sites that create objective content. The issue is, the line between news and opinion is all but erased in some cases, leaving some consumers to believe the latter is the former. Algorithms also help create these echo chambers, reinforcing preexisting beliefs and limiting exposure to diverse viewpoints for consumers.
Just the sheer volume of information can be overwhelming. It’s coming at us from all sides, which allows some news consumers to feel they don’t need traditional journalists.
The elephant (or donkey) in the room)
Then there’s the elephant in the room: the distrust of media in general. Because we can pick and choose what information flows our way, many people consider the other side to be “fake news.” Fake news is absolutely an issue. But legitimate, confirmable news that doesn’t fit your narrative isn’t fake. You don’t have to like it, but you do have to accept that it exists.
The Future of Journalism and Democracy
Quite the rosy picture, huh? So, what’s next? Journalism will always have a role in shaping how consumers gather news, and how they learn about politics in general. The mechanism may shift, the platforms may change, and consumers may have to do more work to ensure objectivity in their newsfeeds. It’s on all of us. It’s on journalists to work toward objectivity, away from sensationalism, and toward more depth in political reporting. For consumers, we must think for ourselves, expose ourselves to different opinions, and to seek the truth, wherever that might be.
Leave a Reply