Agreed - but - we need examples, even if they are aspirational. Who is doing this? Who shows potential to do this?
Not least, who has done this in the past? During Nixon's presidency, during the McCarthy era, during the late 1930's?
In the late 1930's, Alfred Loomis and MIT worked on getting the message to FDR that radar communications would be needed to outrun Nazi Germany. Do we have a Loomis?
Plus, what about an interview with Mitch McConnell. He has been voting against Trump appointees. He has been an insider and power player. What ideas does he have?
A Nato for the press is an intriguing idea. But I think we are in the midst of a constitutional crisis--one that pits the president against a supine Congress that has chosen not to exercise its Article I powers. I agree that defying the judiciary would constitute a yet graver crisis, but it's not hyperbole to say that Trump has already provoked such a crisis.
Agree Congress is supine. Don’t agree that’s unprecedented (see FDR in 1933, LBJ in 1965), or even a crisis. The Constitution did not assume everyone would always contend, only that they could, and mostly would.
I know I am not the only one who feels this way, but as the cofounder of a local news startup with national ambitions, my ears perk up whenever I hear opinion leaders make these calls for action. We can all agree that "something needs to be done," but it's frustrating to have a solution with "transformative ideas and innovative approaches" get dismissed because we're "for-profit" or don't fit into preconceived notions of how local news organizations must be structured or financed. We're written off for being exactly what people are calling for.
The inability of those with resources or expertise to think outside their silo makes one wonder if they're serious about solving the problem or if it's all lip service. Are they sticking to their model because it'll work this time, damn it, and hoping someone else takes the risk with the innovative stuff? They call for change but refuse to do so themselves. Meanwhile, the problem gets worse, sustainable solutions fail to get the attention and investment they deserve, and democracy declines.
Where's the blog post with the names of investors, foundations, corporations, anyone who will put their time and money where their mouth is? You can't swing a cat without finding someone wanting to invest in a social media or banking app, but it's damn near impossible to do so with a news company. Given people's networks and their stated interest in solving this problem, identifying investors and talent shouldn't be hard, but it is. Consider this an invitation to raise your hand and get in the game. Help solve the problem instead of just complaining about it.
If you want to help, message me, and I'll share more about what we're doing.
Excellent suggestions. I am concerned though that we are going to see a radically scaled up version of the phenomenon reported in: https://www.amazon.com/When-Prophecy-Fails-Leon-Festinger/dp/1905177194 The short version of that is that disconfirmation (paradoxically) strengthened the beliefs of the cult members. So I worry that the press will report facts, many of them disconfirming, and the effect will be to put more steel in the edifice of unreason. Godel was right: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_Loophole The system can unwind itself and seems to be doing it now.
Excellent post Dick. You make some important points about history repeating itself and the importance of backbone. But, importantly, you offer solutions. 🙏
Query for both @dicktofel and @jamestraub: would you say that using multiple executive orders to set policy is a serious enough end run around (even a supine) Congress to be in the realm of a constitutional crisis? Yes, our system contemplates EOs but not, I think, like this.
I would say no. There has been lots of executive order overreach, if we're being candid, in each of the last three presidencies. This is of a much larger order, and much quicker, but as long as the courts continue to fulfill their role, I see that as the Constitution operating, not it breaking down.
I agree with what Dick is saying. And I wish every news organization in this nation devoted resources to a local and regional version of Poynter's PolitiFact, and that media with a national following offered a national and international fact check service. I find myself all too often posting links to facts on lies made on Facebook or X (often by people I know), lies that fuel the support for the outrageous actions of Trump and Musk.
Normally, I love this column. But this one argued with itself about how best to handle the Discount Mussolini's attack on our government and the media. Don't fund small outlets but fund innovation? Fight hard but everything is not existential?
The only good takeaway is a Media NATO to defend journalists and journalism institutions.
A always, good points, Dick! People really need to pay attention, especially now ...
Agreed - but - we need examples, even if they are aspirational. Who is doing this? Who shows potential to do this?
Not least, who has done this in the past? During Nixon's presidency, during the McCarthy era, during the late 1930's?
In the late 1930's, Alfred Loomis and MIT worked on getting the message to FDR that radar communications would be needed to outrun Nazi Germany. Do we have a Loomis?
Plus, what about an interview with Mitch McConnell. He has been voting against Trump appointees. He has been an insider and power player. What ideas does he have?
A Nato for the press is an intriguing idea. But I think we are in the midst of a constitutional crisis--one that pits the president against a supine Congress that has chosen not to exercise its Article I powers. I agree that defying the judiciary would constitute a yet graver crisis, but it's not hyperbole to say that Trump has already provoked such a crisis.
Agree Congress is supine. Don’t agree that’s unprecedented (see FDR in 1933, LBJ in 1965), or even a crisis. The Constitution did not assume everyone would always contend, only that they could, and mostly would.
Terrific points.
I like the idea of interviewing Mitch McConnell.
I know I am not the only one who feels this way, but as the cofounder of a local news startup with national ambitions, my ears perk up whenever I hear opinion leaders make these calls for action. We can all agree that "something needs to be done," but it's frustrating to have a solution with "transformative ideas and innovative approaches" get dismissed because we're "for-profit" or don't fit into preconceived notions of how local news organizations must be structured or financed. We're written off for being exactly what people are calling for.
The inability of those with resources or expertise to think outside their silo makes one wonder if they're serious about solving the problem or if it's all lip service. Are they sticking to their model because it'll work this time, damn it, and hoping someone else takes the risk with the innovative stuff? They call for change but refuse to do so themselves. Meanwhile, the problem gets worse, sustainable solutions fail to get the attention and investment they deserve, and democracy declines.
Where's the blog post with the names of investors, foundations, corporations, anyone who will put their time and money where their mouth is? You can't swing a cat without finding someone wanting to invest in a social media or banking app, but it's damn near impossible to do so with a news company. Given people's networks and their stated interest in solving this problem, identifying investors and talent shouldn't be hard, but it is. Consider this an invitation to raise your hand and get in the game. Help solve the problem instead of just complaining about it.
If you want to help, message me, and I'll share more about what we're doing.
Excellent suggestions. I am concerned though that we are going to see a radically scaled up version of the phenomenon reported in: https://www.amazon.com/When-Prophecy-Fails-Leon-Festinger/dp/1905177194 The short version of that is that disconfirmation (paradoxically) strengthened the beliefs of the cult members. So I worry that the press will report facts, many of them disconfirming, and the effect will be to put more steel in the edifice of unreason. Godel was right: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_Loophole The system can unwind itself and seems to be doing it now.
Excellent post Dick. You make some important points about history repeating itself and the importance of backbone. But, importantly, you offer solutions. 🙏
Query for both @dicktofel and @jamestraub: would you say that using multiple executive orders to set policy is a serious enough end run around (even a supine) Congress to be in the realm of a constitutional crisis? Yes, our system contemplates EOs but not, I think, like this.
I would say no. There has been lots of executive order overreach, if we're being candid, in each of the last three presidencies. This is of a much larger order, and much quicker, but as long as the courts continue to fulfill their role, I see that as the Constitution operating, not it breaking down.
I agree with what Dick is saying. And I wish every news organization in this nation devoted resources to a local and regional version of Poynter's PolitiFact, and that media with a national following offered a national and international fact check service. I find myself all too often posting links to facts on lies made on Facebook or X (often by people I know), lies that fuel the support for the outrageous actions of Trump and Musk.
Normally, I love this column. But this one argued with itself about how best to handle the Discount Mussolini's attack on our government and the media. Don't fund small outlets but fund innovation? Fight hard but everything is not existential?
The only good takeaway is a Media NATO to defend journalists and journalism institutions.