12/19/2009 11:18:30 PM EST

The Media's Faustian Bargain

posted by Cenk

I think the main problem with the mainstream media (traditional media, old media, whatever you'd like to call it) is that they are obsessed with access. They suck up to politicians, celebrities, whoever else they think is important or powerful in order to gain access to them. And they compromise the truth to do so. That's their Faustian bargain

Email Print
Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit Facebook
A secondary problem is corporate and conglomerate media, where the news organization is part of, and serves the needs of, a larger corporate entity. Both of these problems were highlighted in an interesting and unexpected case this week -- Tiger Woods coverage. Or in this case, the lack thereof.

Take a look at this video to see how the media trades truth, facts, reporting, etc. for access and larger corporate interests:

Also, see Chris Matthews coverage of the powerful in order to curry favor in the political world.

This is the system that must be challenged, We are given farce and facade instead of reality. It's time to change that equation. That is part and parcel of what we're trying to do with The Young Turks.

< Confusion about Membership Signups | Where is the Live Show? >
 Display:
The Media's Faustian Bargain | 9 comments (9 topical, 0 hidden)
hmmm... (none / 0)
I've already commented on this videoclip and Cenks analysis of the media here so not to repeat myself click the link to read if you are interested...

Love Thothlike

by Thothlike on 12/20/2009 01:01:19 AM EST

MSM opened spot for TYT to exist (none / 0)

by toosinbeymen on 12/20/2009 01:15:44 AM EST

Real news only interesting to tiny US minority (none / 0)

by toosinbeymen on 12/20/2009 01:17:58 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Do we like the comfort of our dumbed down reality? (none / 0)

by toosinbeymen on 12/20/2009 01:21:17 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Information is power (none / 0)
Capitalism is the controlling force in all institutions of the western world and the mass media is no exception as illustrated by the Woods clip. But when you refer to the "old gray ladies" and others hemorrhaging readers and viewers you uncover the real ebb and flow of the truth seeking public. It is extremely important that we maintain news vehicles like TYT that are heterodox toward the conglomerates like TimeWarner and American Media because when you present a free flow of ideas the truth reigns and the corrupt doctrines of the media giants are effectively subverted. I just don't want to find out that TYT can be bought as well...

by Mikerhoa on 12/20/2009 11:00:03 AM EST

Bought? (none / 0)
Are you referring to special access being accorded to TYT's colonels and generals, or something worse, down the road maybe?

by Landbeyond on 12/21/2009 08:31:50 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Something worse? (none / 0)
Even more sinister? I shudder at the thought of that!

"The first thing Fascists usually try to do is silencing the opposition."

by opposition on 12/21/2009 09:00:27 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Not Going to Change ... At Least For Now (none / 0)

You can't really change how it works because it's profit driven. Most people want to watch the shows or read the papers or magazine that get access to celebrities and politicians. I could care less what celebrities do since I think we cover too much about their lives anyway; but as long as politicians keep gravitating towards media that is nice to them you won't escape the vicious loop, at least in the short-run. The only "mainstream media" outlet that is even semi-protected from this is PBS, because of their funding scheme; but even they fall victim on occasion. I'm not suggesting we force media to be non-profit, that would be absurd and likely unconstitutional; but it would certainly be nice if it happened on its own.


Obviously there are some exceptions. For example, The Young Turks is obviously for-profit, but part of your appeal is you don't fall into the suck-up trap. This is mainly due to the difference in the internet-news audience versus the mainstream media-news audience (in particular, television news audience). For mainstream media outlets to be very profitable, they have to pander for that access a bit.
However, it might be the rise of internet news that provides the much needed competition to the media to improve their standards over the coming years.


I have hope based on history. The media's responsibility tends to move in cycles through U.S. history. While most of the newspapers were jokes in the beginning days, the early 1800s brought wonderful editors that changed newspapers that brought discipline to them and made them legitimate. In the mid 1800s to early 1900s, journalists were downright hostile to public figures. It was the goal of most journalists to be the muckraker, to bring down a politician in a scandal or to expose government incompetence or abuse at the highest levels. This style was widely popular until Pulitizer and Hearst came in and turned it into corporate empires. Yellow Journalism came about. Not only were the stories over-the-top and sometimes down-right fabricated in order to sell more copies (Fox News anyone ??), but they also played favorites to get access (all of the media)? and when they wouldn't pander to them they attacked them unfairly (Hearst and FDR, or Obama and Fox). The rise in the popularity in film-based news (1920s on) and television news (1950s on) over the years eroded readership of these papers so they attempted a new model of journalism and returned back to hard-hitting journalism to compete since their old model didn't work anymore (e.g. Pentagon Papers, Watergate etc). My hope is that the rise of the internet will cause a similar movement to greater discipline once again by the press, because newspapers (and television, but less so) still serve, or can serve, a very important role in media. I don't think an all-internet media would be healthy for the country, but I believe the rise of internet media can bring back discipline to the MSM, just as the rise of television did.

by caelum on 12/20/2009 12:01:16 PM EST

What about the Fourth Estate? (none / 0)
All these points are good and valid, but you didn't even mention what I would consider to be the most important point on this issue.

The Founding Fathers gave us a tripartite system of government, dividing authority among the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of government.

But they also relied heavily upon the power of a free press, which they referred to as the Fourth Estate, in recognition of its importance as an unofficial 4th protector of our Liberty.

But the MSM have completely abandoned, abrogated, bastardized, and prostituted that vitally important responsibility.

by RedPossum on 12/20/2009 01:28:28 PM EST

The Media's Faustian Bargain | 9 comments (9 topical, 0 hidden)
 Display: