• by Ray Schultz , Columnist, March 6, 2024

At some point in the past, journalists were trained on the job to vet any claims made by sources and to maintain rigid objectivity. 

We’ve passed beyond that, at least in some peoples’ minds, judging by a speech given by New York Times publisher A. G. Sulzberger at the Reuters Institute at Oxford in the UK earlier this week. 

It’s not so much that journalistic practices have changed, but there are new pressures that threaten independence. 

First, there is the erosion of the news business itself. Sulzberger noted that “about a third of all newsroom jobs have disappeared in the last 15 years, and local newspapers continue to close at a rate of more than two a week.”

He added that news organizations now have to “compete in an information ecosystem dominated by a handful of tech giants and polluted with misinformation, conspiracy theories, propaganda, and clickbait — all of which are further eroding trust in media.”

Then there are the accusations of bias from all sides. “Not long ago, from my office window in midtown Manhattan, I watched a mass of people protesting our supposed anti-Palestinian bias, while they stood directly below a billboard denouncing our supposed anti-Israel bias.”

That left Sulzberger with “the unnerving realization that an increasingly self-sorted and intensely polarized public is perhaps most unified in the belief that any journalist who challenges their side’s narrative must be getting the story wrong.”

This trend was reinforced when both sides of the Gaza war issue confronted a foreign correspondent at a dinner, accusing the Times of bias. “There was complete mutual incomprehension,” the reporter said.

That’s a telling phrase: mutual incomprehension. What causes it?

“Like never before, the social media era encourages the public to self-sort into communities unified by shared identity, interest or worldview. These groups form their own narratives, which harden and become more extreme. Louder voices rise to the top, as they inevitably do in digital environments. These echo chambers celebrate work that conforms to their narratives and protest anything that challenges them.”

Finally, there are the deadly threats being made against journalists, and the deaths on the job. 

But Sulzberger insists that journalists must continue to do their jobs. 

“Overcoming those forces and bringing communities together to understand the options, make hard decisions, and take action requires trustworthy facts and mutual understanding. And facts and understanding are precisely what independent journalism offers society.”

Just what does Sulzberger mean by independent journalism?

“Independence does not mean both-sidesism,” he said. “It doesn’t mean centrism or neoliberalism or a defense of the status quo. It’s not a get-out-of-jail-free card for inaccurate or unfair coverage. And it's also not an innate personal characteristic any of us were born with. It's a professional discipline to which journalists must recommit each day.”

Just as the good ones always have.