Journalism isn't what it used to be. The standard and purpose drifted out of objective reporting and into persuasion. Even the commentary is less of a description and more of a promotion, while the difference between reporting and commenting is disappearing.

Click baiting is becoming the norm. An earth shaking title is used, and under it is nothing for information, just a lead on while values are promoted. A common tactic is to review history which is trivial and wore out as a medium for promoting values.

The most common example is to assure us that global warming is real, and the few opponents who assume otherwise are a threat to science and must be silenced. This from persons who have never studied an iota of science in their lives but speak for the scientists.

If this problem were an obscure part of the internet, you would say, each to his own. But it is a force which is railroading the social realities.

If every viewpoint were represented, the most worthy would prevail. But the contrivance purifies itself around motives, where only one version is allowed.

Intolerance jumps out of the journalism as endless attacks upon critics and cries for keeping the crazies off the internet. Critics are not opposed; the process of criticism is opposed, which eliminates the need to account for criticism.

There is an underlying force railroading the social realities. It is seen in political turmoil as polarization.

In a simplistic way, talk radio epitomizes the problem. People tune in to what they want to hear and get their beliefs and assumptions reinforced.

One of the things being missed is that journalists are doing the same thing. They usually don't have a clue as to what the basic realities of a subject consist of, they just borrow their story from other journalists.

This process condenses realities down to one version only. When a new story develops, there is some fishing around for the best sell. Over time, the story-line gets refined, condensed and spun so thoroughly that no one is allowed to think otherwise.

The most developed examples are the social fantasies of global warming, renewable energy, carbon free electric vehicles, self-driving vehicles, artificial intelligence and travel to other planets. There is not a trace of objective reality to these fantasies. They got there the same way politics got polarized through talk radio, but as journalists feeding journalists.

Of course, there must be a more basic underlying problem. One glimpse of it is in the fact that society is no longer science educated. Superficially, it appears that society lost contact with the objective realities of science. Just because journalists keep harping on the real science which they represent doesn't mean they represent the real science. Such harping is a compensation mechanism. Journalists are so conflicted with real science that they need to preempt criticism by saying the opposite. Speaking in opposites is how conservatives have been deflecting criticism for decades.

But the science problem is more consequence than cause. The underlying problem is an absence of developed, objective reality as knowledge. Without knowledge, a lot of gimmickry is needed to create substitutes. Looking to consensus is an attempt to find what has been working for others. It creates reality drift. Consensus can't stay on track without objective reality, because too many corruptive influences send it astray.

The absence of objective reality as knowledge is a product of power mongering. Power mongers select for like-minded persons to reinforce their corruptions. That means ignorant persons are moved upward, and rational persons are stomped under. The rest is history.
 

Home Page	Science Errors	Sociology of Corruption