MAGA Words #2
Is Today The New Age Of Yellow Journalism?
The world of academia has become stupefyingly obtuse to the average person, and business complexities even more so. We've replaced Latin as the language used to hide the mysteries of the powerful, with a plethora of euphemisms - like 'shareholder value', 'corporate subsidies', 'trickle-down economics' and the like. The titles and descriptions our politicians attach to legislation are themselves counter-indicative of the contents: “Inflation Reduction Act” (which deals primarily with climate), “Every Student Succeeds Act” (expanded support for charter schools and attacked public schools), and the Clear Skies Act of 2002 (weakening the Clean Air Act), and the Healthy Forests Initiative, which became law in 2003 (gave timber companies more access to cut down trees in forests). These are all just terms for transferring resources/wealth from the majority and the nation to a tiny minority, who live like Kings in an age when we thought all the kings were dead.
For the layperson this is troublesome to break down and understand, even if you have the knowledge. However, the average person doesn't understand the modern lingua-franca of the business and political worlds; now - layer on top of that a massive topping of misdirection and propaganda, and your job is really cut out for you if your starting point is an average blue collar, middle class person who didn't read much when they were in school. With the degradation of our school system, this continues to get worse. So I think it is wrong to blame the victim in this case. The system and its erosion since the 1980s stacks the deck against them and cultural expectations lead them astray, and they become depoliticized victims in the process. This echos back to the Catholic church's soft control through the use of Latin to obscure the 'mysteries' and lend authority to the church through the priesthood.
Latin at the time of the early church was the language of the educated elite. Other languages like Greek or Aramaic were known by the uneducated congregants, but were abandoned in favor of Latin. When the church made Latin the only language for mass, it turned the majority of people from active participants into passive observers. I hope you can see the pattern here. In the case of the church, there was very little the uneducated peasants could do about the situation. Today, the middle class is better educated to at least have the basic reading skills necessary to suss it out. The problem now is time and money: even if motivated, it is more difficult for a blue collar worker, who may have to have two or more jobs to make ends meet, to then have the free time available to separate fact from fiction of what is going on in the world of politics and business today.
In the past we had the press. The newspaper was a consistent way of getting factual information in a slower age where things were not so hectic, and people actually earned a living wage, and had the time to read the paper over their coffee in the morning, or on the ride on the train into the city. People expected a certain amount of authenticity and authority to what they were reading, and they largely got it through the efforts of dedicated professionals who were motivated by truth and who’s reputation hinged on consistent and accurate reportage in the 20th century.
Today with the advent of social media the sources of ‘information’ are many and varied. At the same time, the newspaper industry has been systematically disassembled and journalism has become a dying field of employment as layoffs and salary cuts continue on. To add insult to injury, you have corporate consolidation and ownership by the rich who directly manipulate the editorial control of the output, rather than leaving an independent editor-in-chief in charge. Most recently this caused them to abnegate their duty as the 4th Estate/Branch in the last election. There is a plethora of information out there available to our middle class to read, but most of it is garbage and not well organized and curated into something easily and regularly digestible by the average person.
I think the 1890s comes closest to our current situation. The term Yellow Journalism was coined to describe the battle between the two largest papers in New York city at the time: the New York World, and the New York Journal. Each day the papers would raise the ante on sensationalism to gain sales, often reporting stories with little basis in reality. The papers incorporated exaggerated headlines, unverified claims, partisan agendas, and a focus on topics like crime, scandal, sports, and violence to win their audience at the expense of truth. This sounds very familiar to what we encounter today in our own sources of information. The differentiating factor between 1895 and today is the sheer volume of sources. In 1895, you had two choices: the World, or the Journal. Today the variation and numbers of sources is mind boggling with framing from any angle you can think of. From podcasts, videos on various platforms, to blogs, layered on top of the traditional print and network cable/TV news media - your choices are immense and it is a free-for-all.
So how do we as consumers of the information negotiate these minefields of misinformation? Most of the people in need of high quality information, don’t even know that they need it, or have been conditioned to refuse it. Those of us who know, are already taking actions to ensure we get the real information we need. With continuing attacks on librarians, journalists, and education in general, the problem seems insurmountable. A frontal assault on the victims of this destruction is not the answer, and has already been shown to drive further wedges between us. Calling them stupid, and ignorant only makes them more defensive and less likely to question MAGA propaganda.
We must build something with integrity, and grow it one reader/subscriber at a time. The truth will set you free, as the saying goes:
It must be consistent. An inconsistent message will cause potential subscribers to question the reality of what you are reporting.
It must be truthful, and focus on showing people with verifiable facts that they can judge for themselves. Punditry is a waste of time, and gets nowhere.
It must build a relationship between the channel/publication and the subscribers. People are choosing to spend hours listening to Joe Rogan for example, not because he is truthful or consistent, but because they recognize he is an average guy, like them. They forgive his mistakes, even as egregious as they are, and accept his authority on different subjects because of years of building that relationship.
It must be free from entanglements or ownership by the oligarchy. Corporations and the rich have no place in what we are building as a people. It must be free from the corruption of such influences, as we saw in this last election.
Finally it must be free of neoliberalism, the reappearance of 19th-century ideas associated with free-market capitalism. The source of the accelerated destruction we see today can be traced back to the Democratic party ‘New Democrats’ embracing neoliberalism during the Clinton administration. Their leadership continues to drag down the party when a growing majority of young people are demanding progressive reforms. The apathy produced by being ignored and disenfranchised inside of the Democratic party is leading to depoliticization on the left - which we saw with lower voter turnout in this election.
This pattern of depoliticization on both the Right and the Left only helps the oligarchy, and that is what we have to fight against:
