Once they were the hallmark of American politics, literary society, art and literature. But today conversation, persuasion and debate are nearly a lost art - or at least their voices are barely heard above the din of the screaming.
We used to have "talking heads" or "news readers" on television; now we have all "commentators" and "analysts" who are so disinterested in discussion or other opinions that they shout over each other while the host-moderator stands by impotently like an NHL umpire watching a gloves-off fight.
Remember the idea of conversation or persuasion - you talk, I talk, you have facts, I have facts, we discuss them, potentially I change your mind or you change mine, but at the least, we each walk away with a little more information than we had before. We each are somewhat better informed. And we, most importantly, we did so with some respect.
There seem to be two reasons why this form of debate and discussion no longer exists: first, it requires intelligence and actual facts to pull it off; and second, the mass media finds it more profitable to air entertainment disguised as news - just as the NHL is a giant fist-fight disguised as sport.
As newspapers - the last bastion of verified and vetted factual information - begin their slide into the ooze, a lot of bloggers and media analysts are looking for the next generation of information. Where will it come from? How will it be delivered? Are bloggers journalists?
The question really seems to be at this point whether the public knows the difference between news and entertainment. I suspect the answer is no. The major component of news is actual verifiable fact which means that it was supported by more than one source or by a single incontrovertible source.
In the endless blathering about Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court, I have heard various CNN "analysts" report that the New Haven firefighter's lawsuit that she ruled on - as a part of the US Circuit Court of Appeals - was brought by "white and hispanic firefighters" or by "white firefighters". So which is it? It's not all that hard to find out with a little digging.
I can already hear the voices of citizen journalism decrying the old "legacy media" obsession with facts rather than the bigger picture. Unfortunately, a bigger picture made up of inaccuracies is a surrealistic masterpiece. Facts matter. It's not the same as bad grammar - it's bad information. And because most people believe what they hear, it is all the more important that we get the information right.
There is a legitimate debate to have about the naming of any individual to the Supreme Court - to review their decisions, to evaluate their judicial preferences and temperament, and to assess whether the nominee has the mental and emotional stamina the job most certainly demands. But that debate has to be based on factual information - not innuendo, misrepresentations and hearsay. Consumers of news believe what the news outlets say and as such they have a responsibility to present fact, to ask questions of news sources that result in dredging up more facts and present fair information to the consumer so that each one can make an intelligent decision.
The new journalist is grasping onto tools like Twitter and Facebook as a way to facilitate crowd sourcing - using your readers to help you gather information. But crowd sourcing is an investigative tool that adds to reporting, not one that replaces it. All too often, journalists go all-in one way or another - a story is either nothing but the person on the street opinion or nothing but the dry recitation of facts. Whether they write for print, for blogs, or report for video outlets from YouTube to CNN, journalists/bloggers have - with few exceptions - yet to figure out how to merge the two. And it appears to be getting worse.
Why should you care? Because the burden falls on the consumer to find the facts amid the commentary and the shouting. It also falls to the consumer to demand better information from the prime news outlets whether they be blogs or TV networks or printed newspapers.
News - like everything else - is a product and if the consumer seems happy enough with the product they are getting, there's little incentive for the news and information outlets to do anything much different.
Demand your right to a fair and accurate information stream. Give it up and it may be far harder to get it back than it was to lose it in the first place.
