fbpx

Why Did the Media Botch Covington Lack of Diversity?

David Suissa is Publisher & Editor-in-Chief of Tribe Media/Jewish Journal, where he has been writing a weekly column on the Jewish world since 2006. In 2015, he was awarded first prize for "Editorial Excellence" by the American Jewish Press Association. Prior to Tribe Media, David was founder and CEO of Suissa Miller Advertising, a marketing firm named “Agency of the Year” by USA Today. He sold his company in 2006 to devote himself full time to his first passion: Israel and the Jewish world. David was born in Casablanca, Morocco, grew up in Montreal, and now lives in Los Angeles with his five children.

https://jewishjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/jj_avatar.jpg
David Suissa
David Suissa is Publisher & Editor-in-Chief of Tribe Media/Jewish Journal, where he has been writing a weekly column on the Jewish world since 2006. In 2015, he was awarded first prize for "Editorial Excellence" by the American Jewish Press Association. Prior to Tribe Media, David was founder and CEO of Suissa Miller Advertising, a marketing firm named “Agency of the Year” by USA Today. He sold his company in 2006 to devote himself full time to his first passion: Israel and the Jewish world. David was born in Casablanca, Morocco, grew up in Montreal, and now lives in Los Angeles with his five children.

By now it is widely accepted that the mainstream media rushed to judgment and botched the Covington Catholic High School story. The real question is, Why? How could they blow it so badly?

It’s not enough to blame social media. Twitter is a tool, not a person. Journalists are human — they can’t help but be influenced by their own worldviews. We should stop pretending that reporters only seek facts, balance and fairness. There are certainly some who do, but the majority are fallible human beings attached to their worldviews. In the age of Trump, this attachment has been especially difficult to hide, both from the right and the left.

As Frank Bruni courageously wrote in The New York Times:

“We react to news by trying to fit it into the argument that we routinely make, the grievance that we usually raise, the fury or angst or sorrow that we typically peddle. We have our narrative, and we’re on the lookout for comments and developments that back it up. The response to the initial footage of the Covington boys — and, in particular, to the one who wore a red MAGA cap as he stood before and stared at the drumming veteran — adhered to this dynamic.”

In a blistering takedown in The Atlantic, Caitlin Flanagan asks:

“How could the elite media — The New York Times, let’s say — have protected themselves from this event, which has served to reinforce millions of Americans’ belief that traditional journalistic outlets are purveyors of ‘fake news’? They might have hewed to a concept that once went by the quaint term ‘journalistic ethics.’ Among other things, journalistic ethics held that if you didn’t have the reporting to support a story, and if that story had the potential to hurt its subjects, and if those subjects were private citizens, and if they were moreover minors, you didn’t run the story. You kept reporting it; you let yourself get scooped; and you accepted that speed is not the highest value. Otherwise, you were the trash press.”

This soul searching is useful and necessary, but will it prevent another Covington? Not likely. Not when you consider the built-in incentives to maintain the status quo, as Bruni wrote:

“With everything from Twitter followers to television bookings, we’re rewarded for fierce conviction, for utter certainty, for emphatically taking sides and staying unconditionally faithful to what we’ve pushed for and against in the past. We each have our brand, and the narrower and more unyielding it is, the more currency it has and the more loyal our consumers. Instead of bucking the political tribalism in America, we ride it.”

Media outlets from Fox to MSNBC and from Breitbart to The Washington Post also have their “brands.” To protect these brands, they offer ideological consistency. If they introduce too much ideological diversity, they risk diluting their brand. This marketing mentality may make sense for cake mix, but not for journalism. 

As David French writes in National Review Online, “So long as our nation’s newsrooms are ideological monocultures, not even the best of intentions can block the formation of a partisan press.”

An ideal newsroom should include liberal, conservative and centrist reporters. An ideal media company should ensure that a broad ideological perspective is brought to its reporting. Of course, that’s not easy to do when the majority of your writers see things the same way.

You can argue that ideological diversity is probably more important than any other form of diversity. I would rather be defined by how I think and write and act than by my Jewish-Sephardic heritage. That ought to be true of every reporter or commentator.

As French wrote, modern newsrooms “diligently seek to hire reporters from historically marginalized communities. They do not, however, apply the same diligence to hiring people who come from the intellectual and religious communities on the other side of the great American divide. This creates yawning gaps of ignorance.”

Academia has led the way in shaping this limited definition of diversity. As Heather MacDonald wrote in her book, “The Diversity Delusion,” “The roots lie in a charged set of ideas that now dominate higher education: that human beings are defined by their skin color, sex, and sexual preference.”

But why can’t worldviews also define a person and be considered a crucial part of “diversity”?

News organizations have a special obligation to bring ideological diversity into their newsrooms. It may dilute their brands, but we’re selling truth and fairness, not Doritos.

Did you enjoy this article?

You'll love our roundtable.

Enjoyed this article?

You'll love our roundtable.


By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: Jewish Journal, 1880 Century Park East, Los Angeles, CA, 90067, https://www.jewishjournal.com. You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact

Editor's Picks

Latest Articles

Culture

Latest Articles
Latest

Herzl Imagines Der Jundenstaat — the Jewish State

By 1895, Theodor Herzl was increasingly desperate to solve the Jewish Problem. Rebuffed by the super-philanthropist Baron Maurice de Hirsch, Herzl turned to Baron Edmond James de Rothschild, writing an even longer  65-page pitch. Rothschild and his wife, Adelheid von Rothschild, were bankrolling Jewish settlers in Rishon LeZion and Zichron Ya’akov.

Rosner’s Domain: Healthy Skepticism for the New Year

In the past year that ends this weekend, leading to Rosh Hashanah, “no significant deepening of any of the acute challenges facing the Jewish people was observed.

“Boredom is the biggest threat to Judaism”– Rabbi Steve Leder

Listen to the full episode on any of your favorite podcast platforms! In conversation with rabbi and author Steve Leder, on the meaning of regret,...

Berkeley Develops Jewish-Free Zones

Nine different law student groups at the University of California at Berkeley’s School of Law, have begun this new academic year by amending bylaws to ensure that they will never invite any speakers that support Israel or Zionism.

Five Ways to Make Shabbat Dinner the Highlight of Your Young Family’s Week

The practical and spiritual benefits of setting time aside for Shabbat dinner might be exactly the boost our households need.

Hollywood

Podcasts

More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.

x
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap