Tuesday, November 26, 2019

Reporting 2020

We all need to buckle up for an ugly ride in 2020. The US presidential campaign will surely plough new depths and make existing chasms wider. We had better enjoy this Thanksgiving with our divided families because the next one will surely be tougher still. But one group has a real challenge, and that is anybody trying to report the campaign. This will be brutal.

We have had a few trial runs. In Europe, the Brexit referendum, the current UK campaign and recent elections in Italy, Hungary, Poland and elsewhere have involved outside interference and manipulation of the truth and its guardians. In the US, the 2016 campaign established the ugliness and the Mueller and impeachment probes have followed the new pattern. But a perfect storm awaits in 2020.

The media has a bad habit of writing about itself, but I for one do not mind because I find the material fascinating. Just this year I have enjoyed two Broadway plays about newspapers, Network and Ink, and recently loved a British TV import to PBS called Press. In different ways, they all addressed the same basic challenges facing reporters – moneyed owners, ambitious and unscrupulous editors, a public seeking click bait, and competition from new channels. I will predict that the 2020 US election will spawn some tremendous plays for us to enjoy, though only long after it is all over.

At the centre of it all lies the pantomime villain Donald Trump. Trump has been the biggest boon for all media for a generation, because everybody loves to read about Trump. Circulations are up after decades of steady decline, TV news has found a new following and even election turnouts have risen (from disastrous to merely dismal). But Trump poses unique challenges to reporters, and so far few have managed to rise to meet them.

It starts with coverage, truth and balance. Trump has found a way to create his own coverage and pays no respect to truth, thus challenging balance. The biggest mistake we all make with Trump is to over-estimate him. I do not accept that he has a masterful strategy, simply a punchers gut. But that gut seems to have been enough so far, and poor reporting may be partly to blame.

Trump just makes things up, out of a desire to impress and an arrogant sense of impunity. If he says it himself or if it is complimentary, then it is true; otherwise it is fake news. If found out lying or committing any misdemeanour, first he denies, then distracts, then condemns the messenger, and finally simply defies anybody to do anything about it, claiming various presidential and personal privileges. It works. Everybody knows he is guilty of everything thrown at him in the impeachment hearings so far, and he more or less admits it, bullies his party into ignoring it and trusts his public to overlook or even to applaud his actions. Then he changes the subject, and the press and public duly follow his lead.

This creates all sorts of challenges for reporters. First, it is not simple for an organisation professing to be balanced and respected to accuse of the president of the US of lying, again and again. It can be seen as unpatriotic. It can lead to legal challenge.  And it doesn’t really create great copy, being rather technical and monotonous. So what do they do? The PBS news hour uses the expression “claims without evidence”, but that loses impact after a while. Newspapers try ridicule, and leave it to their opinion columns to defend the truth. Fact checkers are quoted against the most egregious claims.

It is tough for reporters to cover this, especially when writing for a publication that tries to retain some sense of balance. Most failed in 2016: Trump’s team love to stir up scandal, such as the Hillary Clinton e-mails. Even if the worst claims about these were true, they paled into insignificance compared with misdemeanours from Trump. Yet somehow the press report both equally, perhaps trying to be balanced, or perhaps lazily picking up what they are fed most avidly. The result is confusion among the public, or a reason to feed existing prejudice, or a conclusion that all politicians lie so all claims can be ignored equally.

Often I wish there was better reporting in the US. Certainly, the BBC, The Guardian and The Economist seem more thorough. Most US outlets have few foreign or investigative reporters these days. Where are the stories about the housing crisis, or monopoly abuse, or military abuse, or the absence of policy of most administration departments? Why do most reporters lazily equate the economic reality of most families to the stock market and jobs report statistics? Then again, part of me has come to believe that even excellent reporting would be largely lost in today’s echo chamber.

Another issue is the unresolved responsibilities of social media providers. It is too easy to blame Facebook and others for every falsehood – like blaming the electricity company for a cold snap. But the providers do need clear policies and regulation, and so far this is absent, or at best emerging and inconsistent. Trump will exploit this in 2020 by feeding off and bullying the providers at the same time.

We can be sure there will be plenty of foreign interference in the 2020 election cycle. Russia almost has carte blanche and will remain several steps ahead of any attempt to rein it in. China will join the party in 2020, though it is unclear on which side. Then there is improper domestic interference from those with the plenty of money and lots to gain or lose. Look out for two or three more outrageous pro-Israel policy announcements in the next twelve months, and be very cynical about their provenance.

We can be sure of wild cards in 2020. The caravans will reappear, along with stories of immigrant crime. Whoever is the Democratic candidate will have some skeleton unearthed, no matter how flimsy or unreasonable. But I can think of three or four likely wild cards that are even more dangerous.

First is Trump’s health. I would be surprised if he gets through 2020 in any sort of strong mental condition. That might lead to hushed up stories, or still wilder behaviour or a debate about his readiness to continue. That could get very ugly.

Next are foreign victories. Trump will have noticed that he has the power to move the stock market daily by making some noise about the China trade talks. The Chinese will have noticed too. Trump will engineer a drop at some point and try to suggest that a Democrat victory would lead to such drops each week. Elsewhere, for sure, Trump will try to engineer some photo ops in 2020 with China, or North Korea or others. These are all dangerous.

Next there is the Supreme Court. Imagine a scenario where Ruth Bader Ginsberg is on a life support machine next August or September, and one side wants her declared dead so they can rush a new judge through the Senate before November? It is not so unlikely.

Then there is out and out cheating. Russian interference or not, voting technology in the US is pretty vulnerable, and gerrymandering and small-scale voter suppression are already rife. The demographics also mean that lopsided results are possible where one side wins many more votes but still loses. And if Trump does lose, even by the biased system in place, don’t expect him to accept the result. 2000 could seem like a genteel discussion before 2020 is over.

I normally like to propose solutions to problems raised in my blogs and to find a cause for optimism, but in this case I find that difficult. For reporters, I don’t see easy answers. Perhaps for the duration of 2020 news outlets can be clearer about sources, claims, facts, lies and opinions, maybe via clear labelling conventions. But even if they did, I am not convinced it would make much difference, because most people will somehow be fed what they want to read anyway.

As for optimism, I suppose we can enjoy some of the theatre, especially if the tragic flawed hero really does get his comeuppance in the end. And, whatever happens, it will pass and humanity will slowly learn and improve. That may not be much comfort for people facing injustice today, nor for Americans who love their country and humans who love their planet.

So I offer no parting optimism today. This will be the ugly. Buckle up.        

No comments: