Searching for Journalistic Integrity

Charles Sullivan

The Concord naturalist and writer Henry Thoreau had a great disdain for the
news — especially that conveyed in the newspapers of his time. Thoreau
never read a newspaper and he was critical of anyone who did. Thoreau
refused to profane his mind with the muck and slime of the daily news,
especially as it related to commerce. Being a critical thinker, Thoreau was
deeply suspicious of anything that appeared in the newspapers. Thoreau gave
us the literary masterpieces Walden, Civil Disobedience and fourteen volumes
of superlative journals. Civil Disobedience has inspired political movements
around the world. Both Martin Luther King and Gandhi were inspired to action
by Thoreau’s powerful political essays. There were many others.Thoreau stated somewhere in the fourteen volumes of his journals: “The first
rule of literary composition is to speak the truth.” In a nutshell this sums
up the ethical obligation of journalism. Nothing more needs to be added or
taken away.

What passes for journalism in America today is an amalgamation of pundits
who spin the news to further the corporatist agenda of privatization. By
privatization I mean the private ownership of everything from public water,
National Forests and National Parks, social security and Medicare, to the
genetic blueprint for life itself. Corporations, contrary to the propaganda
espoused by the huge public relations firms hired by them, rarely operate in
the public interest. What is good for the corporate bottom line is not good
for America. Nor is it good for the world; and it is fatal to democracy as
we know it. As a man who was unusually protective of his freedom, Thoreau
instinctively understood this important lesson and he applied it to his
literary craft.

What responsibility do journalists have? To whom do they have that
responsibility? I ask these questions because journalists play an important
role in how people decide issues and thus which public policies are set in
motion and which are not. Few other professions have such a profound effect
on the public mind as journalism. Journalists bear greater responsibility
toward the public good than to the bottom line of the corporations they work
for. Ultimately, if journalism is to have any integrity or moral authority,
it must be responsible to the truth. That is the only bottom line that
really matters.

During the past thirty years or so we have witnessed a systematic abdication
of journalistic responsibility to truth. When journalists Judith Miller of
the New York Times and now Bob Woodward of the Washington Post were seduced
by proximity to power and by self promotion — they prostituted themselves
in order to gain access to the GOP leadership. In the process they betrayed
the public trust. They placed ego above writing the truth. Because of their
betrayal they have forfeited all journalistic integrity and blackened the
eye of those who still honor the profession with honest work.

The political dialogue that transpires in for profit America is more
illusory than real. As an example, consider the issue of global warming.
Some media sources — Fox News for example — deny that the problem exists;
or that it is human induced. The litany of neoconservative talk show hosts
working the air waves proffer nothing of value on this and other
environmental issues. They have a political agenda that offers no pretense
of objectivity on the important issues of our times. Nothing they say on the
matter of global warming has any relevance to reality. No one considers them
legitimate journalists. Other media, presumably in an effort to appear fair
and balanced, offer bewildering expert testimony from multiple sides of the
issue without revealing the truth. You cannot get the right answers without
asking the right questions and demanding complete candor. Policy makers have
to be held accountable not only to the people, but also to the truth. When
they aren’t, Vietnam and the invasion and occupation of Iraq happen. This is
the result of journalism without conscience or backbone. It is what used to
be called “Yellow Journalism.”

Certainly, the latter method of journalism is preferable to the former. But
it leaves much to be desired because reality exists beyond the pale of
words. While the pundits pontificate upon the issue of global warming the
planet continues to heat up and the effects profoundly impact all of our
lives. The pretense of debate does not affect the reality of what is
happening.

With few exceptions, journalists have aided a corrupt government in selling
its agenda of world domination and privatization to a gullible public. It
has done so through many presidencies; and that is why we find ourselves in
the present conundrum. Journalists cannot have it both ways. You cannot
serve two masters. No one can be completely neutral. No one is totally
objective. We speak and act from a perspective based upon prior experience
and knowledge and — yes — even bias. The key to journalistic integrity is
the same as for personal integrity — to base one’s actions upon a critical
examination of the evidence. We must think for ourselves, rather than do
what we are told.

By consistently allowing those in power the false premise of their arguments
in favor of invading Iraq, when the best available evidence screamed
otherwise, we find ourselves with no credibility in the arena of world
affairs. The rest of the world loathes us in part because our most visible
journalists have turned their back on Thoreau’s simple but eloquent rule of
literary composition — to simply speak the truth. That is the only
obligation any of us have. It is also our best hope for salvation.

[Charles Sullivan is a furniture maker, photographer, and freelance writer
residing in the eastern panhandle of West Virginia. He welcomes your
comments at earthdog@highstream.net.]