Journalism, by taking an increasingly oppositional stance toward the Trump administration over the past four years, has begun to transform itself far more fundamentally than any digital technology (blogging, podcasting, the iPhone) ever has.
For the past 60 years — the occasional well-publicized in-depth investigation aside — most political reporting in the United States has tended to set the boundaries of the possible somewhere in between the positions of both political major parties. Journalists have relied heavily on elite sources (officials in government — not just politicians themselves but their staffers and the permanent Washington bureaucracy) for story tips and off-the-record feedback. In essence, political journalism in the United States has been largely driven by elites, written by elites, and consumed by elites, too.
The problem for Western journalism in the 21st century is that the political elites have revealed themselves to be quite problematic. Public trust in elite systems across the board — from churches to police to legislatures — has caved in. Even more ominously, the elite system seems to be irrevocably divided between a responsible liberal-centrist governance wing and an almost nihilistic right-wing populist insurgency of deliberate misgovernance.
Journalists are thus increasingly forced to choose between either (a) representing the range of important political opinion that actually exists, or (b) holding fast to their foundations as enablers of democracy. How does one enhance the democratic potential of an elite system in which half no longer believes in liberal democracy?
Consider this New York Times story from November 2019, headlined “How the State Dept.’s Dissenters Incited a Revolt, Then a Rallying Cry” and written at the height of the impeachment of President Donald Trump. Penned before the public testimony of a parade of career officials who called for the impeachment of the president, it noted:
Rarely has the State Department, often seen as a staid pillar of the establishment, been the center of a revolt against a president and his top appointees. But as a parade of department officials has recounted to lawmakers how policy was hijacked by partisan politics, many career diplomats say they have been inspired by their colleagues’ willingness to stand up to far more powerful voices after nearly three years of being ignored or disparaged by Mr. Trump and those he has chosen to lead the department.
This story, like many other news reports written during the first term of the Trump presidency, reflects a circumstance that I call “the crackup of the elites.” By this I mean the dynamics by which a relatively coherent system of elite governance, to which journalists have traditionally indexed their information-gathering processes, has begun to decompose.
Under pressure from both the rise of anti-liberal populist parties and the increasing centrality of social media in the formal and informal mechanisms of political communication, the elite system that once powered journalistic operations in democratic states has turned against itself.
This creates critical procedural problems for high-level public affairs reporting that have been exacerbated and complicated by a normative impasse: The anti-liberal tendencies of new elites expose the underlying and unexpressed liberalism of most of the political media, forcing them to choose between their values and what they see as their duty to report the positions and statements of those in positions of political power.
We can see this clearly in the example above from the Times, but it’s been repeatedly evident, across news coverage of not only the Trump administration but of the regimes of many hobbled democracies across the western world. It highlights yet another degradation of journalism’s long-held ideals, in which the conditions on the ground sorely undercut the conditions of the imagination.
The output of news outlets reporting on the administration regularly came to resemble coverage of political machinations in foreign autocratic countries more than it did the centrist, understated, and unproblematized articulations of the lifetime bureaucrats of Foggy Bottom, which had long characterized the Times and other media like it.
With power soon to be back in the hands of Biden and his team of (depending on how you want to look at it) either steady professionals or his out-of-touch old friends, the major question for the next year is how journalism will reorient itself. Now that the so-called “adults are back in charge,” American journalism will have to decide whether it learned a liberal lesson from the past four years or a radical lesson. Either would represent a major change, but to greater and lesser degrees.
If journalism has learned a liberal lesson, it would see its mission as having largely been successful: The Republic didn’t collapse, liberal norms were (barely) upheld, and journalism outed itself as having a value system — a liberal one. To the degree that the GOP continued to try to overturn elections and subvert liberal norms, beltway journalism would remain opposed to it.
If journalism has learned a radical lesson, though, it will have learned that it should always be opposed to political elites, whether Republican or Democrat, and that this oppositional stance also needs to embrace the marginalized and the historically left-out: women, Black and Latinx communities, LGBT and trans people. It would engage in what Wesley Lowrey has called a true “reckoning with objectivity.”
What journalism will do in 2021 remains to be seen. But for a clue as to the consequences of either choice, it would behoove Americans to cast their gaze a little wider and look at how journalists in the rest of the world have functioned under decaying democratic regimes.
Twentieth-century America held tightly to the illusion that there’s no gap between objectivity and justice. Only in America do we think “fake news” is a new phenomenon. And our long-held assumption that our elites were generally responsible and trying to “do what’s best” has been profoundly tested. For better or worse, those days are over, and only an act of deep historical amnesia can bring them back.
C.W. Anderson is a professor of media and communication at the University of Leeds.
Journalism, by taking an increasingly oppositional stance toward the Trump administration over the past four years, has begun to transform itself far more fundamentally than any digital technology (blogging, podcasting, the iPhone) ever has.
For the past 60 years — the occasional well-publicized in-depth investigation aside — most political reporting in the United States has tended to set the boundaries of the possible somewhere in between the positions of both political major parties. Journalists have relied heavily on elite sources (officials in government — not just politicians themselves but their staffers and the permanent Washington bureaucracy) for story tips and off-the-record feedback. In essence, political journalism in the United States has been largely driven by elites, written by elites, and consumed by elites, too.
The problem for Western journalism in the 21st century is that the political elites have revealed themselves to be quite problematic. Public trust in elite systems across the board — from churches to police to legislatures — has caved in. Even more ominously, the elite system seems to be irrevocably divided between a responsible liberal-centrist governance wing and an almost nihilistic right-wing populist insurgency of deliberate misgovernance.
Journalists are thus increasingly forced to choose between either (a) representing the range of important political opinion that actually exists, or (b) holding fast to their foundations as enablers of democracy. How does one enhance the democratic potential of an elite system in which half no longer believes in liberal democracy?
Consider this New York Times story from November 2019, headlined “How the State Dept.’s Dissenters Incited a Revolt, Then a Rallying Cry” and written at the height of the impeachment of President Donald Trump. Penned before the public testimony of a parade of career officials who called for the impeachment of the president, it noted:
Rarely has the State Department, often seen as a staid pillar of the establishment, been the center of a revolt against a president and his top appointees. But as a parade of department officials has recounted to lawmakers how policy was hijacked by partisan politics, many career diplomats say they have been inspired by their colleagues’ willingness to stand up to far more powerful voices after nearly three years of being ignored or disparaged by Mr. Trump and those he has chosen to lead the department.
This story, like many other news reports written during the first term of the Trump presidency, reflects a circumstance that I call “the crackup of the elites.” By this I mean the dynamics by which a relatively coherent system of elite governance, to which journalists have traditionally indexed their information-gathering processes, has begun to decompose.
Under pressure from both the rise of anti-liberal populist parties and the increasing centrality of social media in the formal and informal mechanisms of political communication, the elite system that once powered journalistic operations in democratic states has turned against itself.
This creates critical procedural problems for high-level public affairs reporting that have been exacerbated and complicated by a normative impasse: The anti-liberal tendencies of new elites expose the underlying and unexpressed liberalism of most of the political media, forcing them to choose between their values and what they see as their duty to report the positions and statements of those in positions of political power.
We can see this clearly in the example above from the Times, but it’s been repeatedly evident, across news coverage of not only the Trump administration but of the regimes of many hobbled democracies across the western world. It highlights yet another degradation of journalism’s long-held ideals, in which the conditions on the ground sorely undercut the conditions of the imagination.
The output of news outlets reporting on the administration regularly came to resemble coverage of political machinations in foreign autocratic countries more than it did the centrist, understated, and unproblematized articulations of the lifetime bureaucrats of Foggy Bottom, which had long characterized the Times and other media like it.
With power soon to be back in the hands of Biden and his team of (depending on how you want to look at it) either steady professionals or his out-of-touch old friends, the major question for the next year is how journalism will reorient itself. Now that the so-called “adults are back in charge,” American journalism will have to decide whether it learned a liberal lesson from the past four years or a radical lesson. Either would represent a major change, but to greater and lesser degrees.
If journalism has learned a liberal lesson, it would see its mission as having largely been successful: The Republic didn’t collapse, liberal norms were (barely) upheld, and journalism outed itself as having a value system — a liberal one. To the degree that the GOP continued to try to overturn elections and subvert liberal norms, beltway journalism would remain opposed to it.
If journalism has learned a radical lesson, though, it will have learned that it should always be opposed to political elites, whether Republican or Democrat, and that this oppositional stance also needs to embrace the marginalized and the historically left-out: women, Black and Latinx communities, LGBT and trans people. It would engage in what Wesley Lowrey has called a true “reckoning with objectivity.”
What journalism will do in 2021 remains to be seen. But for a clue as to the consequences of either choice, it would behoove Americans to cast their gaze a little wider and look at how journalists in the rest of the world have functioned under decaying democratic regimes.
Twentieth-century America held tightly to the illusion that there’s no gap between objectivity and justice. Only in America do we think “fake news” is a new phenomenon. And our long-held assumption that our elites were generally responsible and trying to “do what’s best” has been profoundly tested. For better or worse, those days are over, and only an act of deep historical amnesia can bring them back.
C.W. Anderson is a professor of media and communication at the University of Leeds.
Samantha Ragland The year of journalists taking initiative
Jacqué Palmer The rise of the plain-text email newsletter
Gordon Crovitz Common law will finally apply to the Internet
Ernie Smith Entrepreneurship on rails
Victor Pickard The commercial era for local journalism is over
Charo Henríquez A new path to leadership
Benjamin Toff Beltway reporting gets normal again, for better and for worse
John Saroff Covid sparks the growth of independent local news sites
Jeremy Gilbert Human-centered journalism
Errin Haines Let’s normalize women’s leadership
Marie Shanahan Journalism schools stop perpetuating the status quo
Zizi Papacharissi The year we rebuild the infrastructure of truth
Masuma Ahuja We’ll remember how interconnected our world is
Delia Cai Subscriptions start working for the middle
Kevin D. Grant Parachute journalism goes away for good
Sumi Aggarwal News literacy programs aren’t child’s play
Jim Friedlich A newspaper renaissance reached by stopping the presses
Ariane Bernard Going solo is still only a path for the few
Don Day Business first, journalism second
Brandy Zadrozny Misinformation fatigue sets in
Tim Carmody Spotify will make big waves in video
Shaydanay Urbani and Nancy Watzman Local collaboration is key to slowing misinformation
Ariel Zirulnick Local newsrooms question their paywalls
Tauhid Chappell and Mike Rispoli Defund the crime beat
Ståle Grut Network analysis enters the journalism toolbox
Jesse Holcomb Genre erosion in nonprofit journalism
Nisha Chittal The year we stop pivoting
Brian Moritz The year sports journalism changes for good
Mark S. Luckie Newsrooms and streaming services get cozy
Sue Cross A global consensus around the kind of news we need to save
Natalie Meade Journalism enters rehab
Tonya Mosley True equity means ownership
Ben Collins We need to learn how to talk to (and about) accidental conspiracists
Rasmus Kleis Nielsen Stop pretending publishers are a united front
Ray Soto The news gets spatial
Cory Bergman The year after a thousand earthquakes
Renée Kaplan Falling in love with your subscription
Nicholas Jackson Blogging is back, but better
A.J. Bauer The year of MAGAcal thinking
Meredith D. Clark The year journalism starts paying reparations
Tanya Cordrey Declining trust forces publishers to claim (or disclaim) values
Juleyka Lantigua The download, podcasting’s metric king, gets dethroned
Sarah Stonbely Videoconferencing brings more geographic diversity
Catalina Albeanu Publish less, listen more
Jennifer Brandel A sneak peak at power mapping, 2073’s top innovation
M. Scott Havens Traditional pay TV will embrace the disruption
Edward Roussel Tech companies get aggressive in local
Sarah Marshall The year audiences need extra cheer
Jennifer Choi What have we done for you lately?
Rick Berke Virtual events are here to stay
Heidi Tworek A year of news mocktails
Joni Deutsch Local arts and music make journalism more joyous
Andrew Ramsammy Stop being polite and start getting real
Gonzalo del Peon Collaborations expand from newsrooms to the business side
Zainab Khan From understanding to feeling
Parker Molloy The press will risk elevating a Shadow President Trump
Mike Caulfield 2021’s misinformation will look a lot like 2020’s (and 2019’s, and…)
Mark Stenberg The rise of the journalist-influencer
Jessica Clark News becomes plural
Matt DeRienzo Citizen truth brigades steer us back toward reality
Alyssa Zeisler Holistic medicine for journalism
Rachel Glickhouse Journalists will be kinder to each other — and to themselves
David Skok A pandemic-prompted wave of consolidation
Tamar Charney Public radio has a midlife crisis
Aaron Foley Diversity gains haven’t shown up in local news
Christoph Mergerson Black Americans will demand more from journalism
Marcus Mabry News orgs adapt to a post-Trump world (with Trump still in it)
Kate Myers My son will join every Zoom call in our industry
Chase Davis The year we look beyond The Story
Stefanie Murray and Anthony Advincula Expect to see more translations and non-English content
Joshua P. Darr Legislatures will tackle the local news crisis
John Davidow Reflect and repent
Julia B. Chan and Kim Bui Millennials are ready to run things
Pablo Boczkowski Audiences have revolted. Will newsrooms adapt?
Bill Adair The future of fact-checking is all about structured data
Moreno Cruz Osório In Brazil, a push for pluralism
Burt Herman Journalists build post-Facebook digital communities
Joanne McNeil Newsrooms push back against Ivy League cronyism
Jody Brannon People won’t renew
AX Mina 2020 isn’t a black swan — it’s a yellow canary
Francesca Tripodi Don’t expect breaking up Google and Facebook to solve our information woes
Hadjar Benmiloud Get representative, or die trying
Julia Angwin Show your (computational) work
Matt Skibinski Misinformation won’t stop unless we stop it
Sam Ford We’ll find better ways to archive our work
Eric Nuzum Podcasting dodged a bullet in 2020, but 2021 will be harder
Gabe Schneider Another year of empty promises on diversity
Michael W. Wagner Fractured democracy, fractured journalism
Sara M. Watson Return of the RSS reader
Taylor Lorenz Journalists will learn influencing isn’t easy
Rishad Patel From direct-to-consumer to direct-to-believers
Nik Usher Don’t expect an antitrust dividend for the media
Alicia Bell and Simon Galperin Media reparations now
Andrew Donohue The rise of the democracy beat
Sonali Prasad Making disaster journalism that cuts through the noise
Steve Henn Has independent podcasting peaked?
Celeste Headlee The rise of radical newsroom transparency
Jonas Kaiser Toward a wehrhafte journalism
Nonny de la Pena News reaches the third dimension
Beena Raghavendran Journalism gets fused with art
Loretta Chao Open up the profession
Doris Truong Indigenous issues get long-overdue mainstream coverage
Amara Aguilar Journalism schools emphasize listening
Ashton Lattimore Remote work helps level the playing field in an insular industry
Nabiha Syed Newsrooms quit their toxic relationships
Annie Rudd Newsrooms grow less comfortable with the “view from above”
Mandy Jenkins You build trust by helping your readers
Linda Solomon Wood Canada steps up for journalism
Richard Tofel Less on politics, more on how government works (or doesn’t)
Talmon Joseph Smith The media rejects deficit hawkery
Cindy Royal J-school grads maintain their optimism and adaptability
J. Siguru Wahutu Journalists still wrongly think the U.S. is different
Danielle C. Belton A decimated media rededicates itself to truth
Jean Friedman-Rudovsky and Cassie Haynes A shift from conversation to action
David Chavern Local video finally gets momentum
Robert Hernandez Data and shame
Colleen Shalby The definition of good journalism shifts
Anna Nirmala Local news orgs grasp the urgency of community roots
Cherian George Enter the lamb warriors
Logan Jaffe History as a reporting tool
Imaeyen Ibanga Journalism gets unmasked
Candis Callison Calling it a crisis isn’t enough (if it ever was)
Alfred Hermida and Oscar Westlund The virus ups data journalism’s game
Garance Franke-Ruta Rebundling content, rebuilding connections
Raney Aronson-Rath To get past information divides, we need to understand them first
John Garrett A surprisingly good year
Bo Hee Kim Newsrooms create an intentional and collaborative culture
Rodney Gibbs Zooming beyond talking heads
José Zamora Walking the talk on diversity
Janet Haven and Sam Hinds Is this an AI newsroom?
Mariano Blejman It’s time to challenge autocompleted journalism
Astead W. Herndon The Trump-sized window of the media caring about race closes again
María Sánchez Díez Traffic will plummet — and it’ll be ok
Patrick Butler Covid-19 reporting has prepared us for cross-border collaboration
Hossein Derakhshan Mass personalization of truth
John Ketchum More journalists of color become newsroom founders
Marissa Evans Putting community trauma into context
Jer Thorp Fewer pixels, more cardboard
C.W. Anderson Journalism changed under Trump — will it keep changing under Biden?
Anthony Nadler Journalism struggles to find a new model of legitimacy
Francesco Zaffarano The year we ask the audience what it needs
Pia Frey Building growth through tastemakers and their communities
Chicas Poderosas More voices mean better information
Ben Werdmuller The web blooms again
Laura E. Davis The focus turns to newsroom leaders for lasting change
Kawandeep Virdee Goodbye, doomscroll
Rachel Schallom The rise of nonprofit journalism continues
Mike Ananny Toward better tech journalism
Nico Gendron Ask your readers to help build your products
Ryan Kellett The bundle gets bundled
Kerri Hoffman Protecting podcasting’s open ecosystem
Whitney Phillips Facts are an insufficient response to falsehoods