The essays, analyses and opinions presented as Community Voices express the perspectives of their authors on topics of interest and importance to the community, and are not intended to reflect perspectives on behalf of the Salish Current.
Commentary: Mainstream news has its strengths, but remains addicted to the same old tropes that have shaped election coverage for decades.
Journalists in America — so far, at least — enjoy the protections of the First Amendment because of the vital role they play in preserving our democracy. Their mission: to tell true stories — fact-based, humane and multidimensional narratives that illuminate complex issues. Responsible news coverage is a public service, giving citizens the information we need to make informed decisions about our public and private lives.
There is no shortage of skilled and principled journalists covering the 2024 presidential election, one in which democracy itself is on the ballot. But principled journalism is only one component in a chaotic information environment, where news deserts proliferate in communities across the country, civic engagement is weak and political opinions — particularly among young people and low-information voters — are increasingly shaped by celebrity trolls, memes, TikTok and ethically unmoored social media influencers.
Mainstream news outlets produced compelling coverage of the recent Kamala Harris-Donald Trump debate. And ABC News moderators lived up to their journalistic duty to fact-check the candidates in real time. But the trending stories in the wake of that debate predictably focused on the bright, shiny objects mass media love.
The world’s most famous popstar/cat lady sticks it to J.D. Vance! Kamala Harris Owns a Gun! Immigrants AREN’T eating cats and dogs in Ohio! Fun stuff, and great fuel for memes and late-night comics. But participating in Trump’s disinformation spectacle caused real harm to real people, and his false claims about immigrants sparked bomb threats and school closures in Springfield, raining discord on a community.
Questions of competence and character
These fleeting controversies keep media from focusing on the important issues. As Election Day approaches, we’re just not seeing enough quality reporting on questions of competence and character that are central to this race.
Presidential debates are just one inflection point in the long arc of an election season. They give voters their best shot at assessing the unfiltered truth about the candidates — in this case, who has the cognitive competence, intelligence, integrity, charisma and discipline to defend the Constitution and run the country.
Joe Biden’s performance in the first debate made clear his cognitive frailty, while Trump, who was arguably equally incoherent at the podium, got a pass from the pundits. Now that the former president has declared he won’t participate in a second debate with Kamala Harris, voters will have one less opportunity to compare his intellectual, psychological and physical fitness with hers.
It will be up to the news media to fill in the gaps.
If you believe the polls, America is deeply and equally divided about whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump should become president. Not surprising that the American Psychiatric Association reports 73% of Americans are experiencing anxiety about the election.
It all comes down to character and competence. And that raises a new ethical challenge for news media: to fully and fairly report on Trump’s mental and cognitive state, just as they did with Joe Biden.
‘Sanewashing’
“Sanewashing” is a new term floating around newsrooms these days. A concept coined in 2020 on Reddit and defined in the Urban Dictionary, sanewashing describes the act of downplaying a person or idea’s radicality to make it more palatable to the general public. “Is the Press Sanewashing Trump?” Columbia Journalism Review asked this week. It’s about time somebody asked.
For years, the national press corps covering Trump has been criticized for routinely reporting based on partial quotes and paraphrases, making Trump’s more incoherent statements sound lucid.
Explanations for sanewashing vary. Pure partisanship is always a possibility. But a kinder explanation lies in journalism’s bias in favor of coherence, The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg has observed. Journalists are explainers. We try to make sense of things. We pride ourselves on making complex issues understandable. In this case, maybe political reporters should rein in that impulse.
Mainstream news has its strengths, but remains addicted to the same old tropes that have shaped election coverage for decades.
As local news outlets disappear in communities across the country, the genuine issues and concerns of the people who live there go largely unreported. The vacuum fills with another tired trope from the national political press corps: reporters who parachute into local communities, interview ordinary folks in diners, barbershops and beauty parlors about their views of the candidates. This results in disingenuous narratives that climb inside the minds of generic “undecided voters” to project the outcome. A true-ish story, not a true one.
Questions of character and competence are key to fully and fairly telling the story of this historic election. The answers will be crucial to this divided nation’s future.
— By Joan Connell
We welcome letters to the editor responding to or amplifying subjects addressed in Community Voices. If you wish to contribute to Community Voices, please send an email with a subject proposal to Managing Editor Patheresa Wells-Vick (pvick@salish-current.org) and she will respond with guidelines.
Help keep the local news flowing — support nonpartisan, fact-based, no-paywall local journalism
with a donation to the Salish Current — news for people, not for profit.