A deep dive into the reasons behind the growing mistrust of mainstream media sources among those born between 1980 and 1999
Recent statistics have revealed an alarming trend: 85% of people do not trust mainstream news sources, while the remaining 15% consume these sources exclusively. Strikingly, the highest rate of distrust is found among individuals born between 1980 and 1999. In this article, we will explore the factors that have led to this skepticism and examine some of the most significant lies and redactions made by mainstream media.
Reasons for Distrust:
- The rise of social media and alternative news sources
As journalist Jeff Jarvis once said, “The internet killed the mass media business model.” With the advent of social media and alternative news platforms, millennials have become increasingly exposed to diverse perspectives and information sources. This has led to a decline in reliance on traditional media outlets and an increased skepticism of their credibility.
- Sensationalism and the decline of journalistic integrity
Millennials have witnessed the erosion of journalistic standards as news organizations increasingly prioritize clicks and views over accuracy and objectivity. Veteran journalist Carl Bernstein lamented this shift, stating, “We are in a new age of journalism where the pressure to produce is greater than the pressure to get it right.” As a result, trust in mainstream media has eroded.
- The 24-hour news cycle and information overload
The never-ending news cycle has led to the continuous bombardment of information, often without proper context or analysis. This information overload has made it difficult for consumers to discern fact from fiction, leading many to question the reliability of mainstream media sources.
Exposing Lies and Redactions:
- The 2003 Iraq War and Weapons of Mass Destruction
The 2003 Iraq War serves as a glaring example of the dangers of misinformation and the media’s failure to rigorously scrutinize claims made by political leaders. The widely accepted narrative that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) was used as a justification for the US-led invasion. However, the subsequent lack of evidence for WMDs dealt a significant blow to the credibility of mainstream media outlets.
In the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, the United States focused its attention on Iraq and its leader, Saddam Hussein. The US administration claimed that Iraq was developing WMDs, posing a threat to global security. These allegations were based on intelligence reports, which were later found to be deeply flawed.
Mainstream Media’s Role:
Several mainstream media outlets played a pivotal role in spreading and legitimizing the WMD narrative. Instead of critically examining the evidence and challenging the assertions made by the US administration, many news organizations echoed the claims without questioning their validity. High-profile journalists and media outlets, such as The New York Times and CNN, published stories based on faulty intelligence, lending credibility to the case for war.
In the years following the invasion, as it became apparent that no WMDs were found in Iraq, the media’s role in perpetuating the false narrative came under scrutiny. The lack of rigorous investigation and uncritical acceptance of the WMD claims significantly damaged the credibility of many mainstream news organizations. Public trust in the media declined, as people felt betrayed and misled by the very institutions meant to inform them.
The 2003 Iraq War and the WMD deception serve as a cautionary tale for both the media and the public. For journalists, it underscores the importance of maintaining high standards of investigation and skepticism, even when faced with seemingly authoritative sources. For the public, it highlights the need to critically evaluate information presented by both the media and political leaders.
The fallout from the 2003 Iraq War and the WMD deception has left a lasting impact on the credibility of mainstream media. To regain public trust, news organizations must prioritize accuracy, objectivity, and comprehensive reporting while holding political leaders accountable for their claims. The media’s role as the fourth estate is vital to a functioning democracy, and maintaining high standards of journalistic integrity is essential to fulfilling that responsibility.
- The 2016 US Presidential Election coverage
The 2016 US Presidential Election coverage was a turning point for many Americans in their perception of mainstream media. Several news outlets faced criticism for biased reporting, particularly against then-candidate Donald Trump. The media’s focus on scandal and sensationalism overshadowed policy issues, ultimately contributing to the growing public distrust in news organizations.
The Role of the Media in Presidential Campaigns:
The media plays a crucial role in shaping public opinion during presidential campaigns by providing voters with information about candidates, their policies, and their qualifications. However, in the 2016 election, many mainstream news outlets were accused of biased reporting and favoritism towards certain candidates.
Bias Against Donald Trump:
During the 2016 campaign, several news outlets were criticized for their negative coverage of Donald Trump. The media often focused on his controversial statements and actions while giving comparatively little attention to his policy proposals. This one-sided coverage led many of his supporters to accuse the media of bias against him and further fueled distrust in mainstream news sources.
Sensationalism Over Substance:
The 2016 election coverage was rife with sensationalism as news organizations prioritized clicks and views over substantive policy discussions. The relentless focus on scandal, controversial statements, and personal attacks often overshadowed the critical policy issues that voters needed to understand in order to make an informed decision.
As Malcolm Muggeridge once said, “News, as any journalist will tell you, is not about what happens, but about what doesn’t happen.” This statement rings true for the 2016 election coverage, as the relentless focus on controversy left little room for meaningful discussions on policy issues.
The Impact on Public Trust:
The perceived bias and sensationalism in the 2016 election coverage further eroded public trust in mainstream media. Many voters felt that news organizations were not providing them with the necessary information to make informed decisions, instead opting for sensational stories that drove clicks and views. This has contributed to the growing skepticism towards mainstream media sources, particularly among those who felt their views and concerns were underrepresented.
- The Covington Catholic High School controversy
The Covington Catholic High School controversy in 2019 serves as a prime example of the consequences of rushed judgment, incomplete information, and media misrepresentation. As the mainstream media hastily condemned the students as racist aggressors, they neglected to consider the full context of the situation. This event demonstrates the importance of thorough reporting, balanced perspectives, and the repercussions of perpetuating misleading narratives.
On January 18, 2019, a group of students from Covington Catholic High School in Kentucky participated in the March for Life event in Washington, D.C. While waiting for their bus near the Lincoln Memorial, the students encountered a small group of Black Hebrew Israelites who were shouting insults at them. Simultaneously, a group of Indigenous activists, including elder Nathan Phillips, were participating in the Indigenous Peoples March at the same location.
The Viral Video and Initial Coverage:
A short video clip of the encounter emerged on social media, showing Covington student Nick Sandmann wearing a “Make America Great Again” hat while standing face-to-face with Nathan Phillips. The clip quickly went viral, with many mainstream news outlets jumping on the story and framing the students as disrespectful, racist aggressors confronting a peaceful Native American elder. The students were subjected to widespread condemnation and harassment online.
The Unraveling Narrative:
As more footage and witness accounts surfaced, it became clear that the initial portrayal of the incident was misleading. The longer videos showed that Nathan Phillips had approached the students while drumming and chanting, and the students claimed they were attempting to drown out the insults from the Black Hebrew Israelites by performing school chants. Many of the initial assumptions made about the students’ intentions and behavior were unfounded.
Media Retractions and Apologies:
With the new context and information, several news organizations and public figures were forced to issue retractions, corrections, and apologies for their hasty and incomplete reporting. The rush to judgment had not only mischaracterized the students but also contributed to the further erosion of trust in mainstream media.
The growing distrust of mainstream news among millennials can be attributed to a combination of factors, including the rise of alternative news sources, the decline in journalistic integrity, and the prevalence of sensationalism. As the mainstream media continues to grapple with its credibility crisis, it is crucial for news organizations to prioritize accuracy and objectivity in order to regain the trust of their audience.
Leave a Reply