The news media is dying. Reporters are getting fired, papers are closing, the television news is dominated by screaming ideologues who think a retraction is what happens after they snort their nightly yard of cocaine. We’ve talked about most of the causes before. Publishers slashed staff in order to maintain unsustainable profit margins, technology erased the local monopoly the papers used to enjoy and people naturally enjoy the natural release of screaming at each other rather than measured debate and yada yada yada. I’d like to tell you about a part of the problem that has not yet been addressed.
You.
Wipe that ridiculous smirk off your face. This ain’t last quarter. Brenna ain’t here. I ain’t joking.
The contraction in news gathering means one thing: There are fewer reporters to cover an increasing and ever more diverse population than ever before. While the ease of technology has made background research very easy, this has not compensated for the simple fact that each reporter has far less time to fill page space than they had previously. As a result, our ability to discern and investigate news beyond what “breaks” in broad daylight is diminishing, the news becomes a more banal, docile creature than it should be and the readership heads off to the blogosphere, where a swirling vortex of unfounded rumor at least give the impression that someone is looking into things.
That’s where you (should) come in. As a general population, you guys know everything there is to know about this society of ours. Contacting us is easier than ever: virtually every respectable publication now places its writers’ work e-mail right on their articles. If you read a news story and think to yourself “X is not entirely true, they missed this,” or “I don’t think that this accurately depicts X,” it is now possible to contact that reporter within five minutes and explain the situation to them, all while listening to some Chopin or downloading the latest achievements in tentacle-themed cinema. Such a simple act yields great benefits for reporter and reader alike.
I have personal experience with this. After writing a workaday brief about the Northwestern budget’s annual fluctuation, a tip from a concerned member of the community informed me that part of the reason that the budget for capital improvements was so high was because the same contractor who provided labor for “Project Cafe” was also auditing its progress. That company (surprise, surprise) recommended additional hirings of its labor, to the tune of $10 million in University funds. I still consider the month I spent researching this issue as the most fulfilling moment of my time as a journalist.
However, the fact that this was the only time a private citizen, unaffiliated with any organization, gave me a tip on a story in my three years as a reporter raises serious questions. Especially given that I repeatedly fielded complaints by people who whined about how The Daily never reported on what they cared about. Well, what have you been doing to help, you self-righteous twit? Either make an effort or stop whining, your choice.
Our e-mails are right here. What are you, blind?
Weinberg senior Michael Gsovski can be reached at [email protected]
