I remember how it started. I was in graduate school at Penn State in the early 90s. A friend of mine started listening to a talk radio show in our office, and I heard the term liberal media. It was the first attack on the press that I remember.
Attacking the media is the first tool in the authoritarian playbook, working to delegitimize a free press. That term simmered for a while, but did not really take off — needing help from the internet age.
As technologies advanced, and the internet became faster, social media became popular. Soon, social media became mobile, and then mobile with video. The last 15 years have fundamentally changed how we all get information.
I was a teenager during the Cold War, and learned about the power that came with having the control of information. The Soviet Union had strict controls on all media, and I have continued to think about that over the last 25 years, watching us rapidly heading in that media direction.
I started working for a Roanoke television station in 1995, and the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was passed a year later, opening the door to widespread media consolidation and the decrease in local control of media. Our station was sold within the year.
Cable television had already taken part of the broadcast audience. Satellite television followed. This meant even fewer eyes to local newscasts, and thus, less revenue. High-speed internet became widely available at the dawn of the century, leading to the rise of social media. Then, as mobile technology advanced, there was video to accompany social media — right in your pocket. Going to a screen was no longer required, the screen was always with you.
As a result, far fewer eyes are going to legacy news operations of the latter 20th century, and as revenues plummeted, it further ripened the business landscape for media consolidation.
As revenues dropped, the profit motive of most corporate media looked for the quickest return on investment. In depth news that cost money to produce and risked legal implications or upset those in power was shelved in favor of talking heads engaged in constant bickering — regardless of any objective reality to serve communities.
Forty years ago, there were about 150 different companies that owned about 1000 commercial television stations. Now, three companies dominate, with each of them owning more than 180 stations across the country. Decisions on content are increasingly made in places far away from the cities and towns that the stations are supposed to serve.
Worse, some ownership groups are very outward in their disdain for a political party. For decades, Republicans have been known as a pro-business party. Corporate media understood that assignment, with some groups forcing their stations to air right-wing commentaries, ripping away local editorial control.
The increased presence of mobile social media with video allowed newer digital information operations to flourish, even with smaller audiences. By cultivating an audience based on anger and fear, two very powerful emotions, they enable a loyal following, returning eyes to the screens and money into these information operations.
As a result, people are now going to digital outlets to get their views of the world validated.
This happened even more quickly with newspapers. Basic advertising revenue, like classified ads, dried up as more people connected digitally. Rudimentary websites sprang up for businesses to market directly to customers. As a result, revenue dropped and a drop in subscriptions followed, especially among younger adults. This started a feedback loop that has led to the hollowing out of once-proud legacy news operations, from the Richmond Times-Dispatch to the Washington Post.
This allows a corrupt authoritarian regime to attack a free press without any fear of pushback. And when the owners of these remaining media industries believe it is in their best financial interest to capitulate to power rather than hold it to account, we get the wholesale firing of journalists who dare to question the government.
Not coincidentally, we have seen a very direct attack on non-profit journalism, like NPR and PBS, because it is vulnerable. However, there is a new business model emerging with some similarities to the public media model. With web publications like The Virginia Mercury, Cardinal News, The Richmonder, and The Fredericksburg Free Press all gaining subscribers and viability this decade.
There are ways to navigate this stream of information, among them is a Media Bias Chart, from a Colorado-based media watchdog and public benefit corporation
It is important for those of us who work in the media to understand our role and continue to ask questions, understand the issues, and report them as fairly and accurately as possible.
Don’t just believe what you want to be true. Check and validate sources to help hold our democracy together.
Sean Sublette, Meteorologist and owner of Sublette Weather and Consulting subletteweather.com
Take Action
- Check and validate your sources before sharing – particularly on social media.
- prioritize .edu sites when doing a search.
- Look to the WHO instead of the CDC and NIH
- In addition to PBS/NPR, try the BBC for coverage of our own domestic situation
- Consider an alternative search engine (for example DuckDuckGo) that does not preferentially display paid results at the top of the search list.
