why journalists are people too

Ok, so the last post was a decidely negative take on the media.  So in this one, I’ll tackle the question of why journalists are doing a great job.

So are journalists all evil-liberal-minions of the fringe left wing?  Uh, no.  Do journalists typically lean left in their thinking?  Uh, yes, about 80-20 in that direction as it turns out.  See study

So what?

So what if more journalists think or lean left in their personal views?  So what if their values don’t reflect that of average Americans (see previous study)?  There is a strong argument to be made that they might be smarter than the average American.

After all, the term “media elite” didn’t just materialize out thin air.  There’s a reason these journalists are elite.  There’s a reason they work for the top employers in their field.  These folks are really, really smart.  They went to the best schools in the world, graduated at the tops of their respective classes and have done some astonishingly good research, writing and reporting over the years in order to ascend to the positions they now hold.

So if they’re smarter, better educated, have access to more information and are surrounded by people just as informed and intelligent as they are, shouldn’t we listen to them?

Here’s the point:  opinion, personal belief, value systems, et al will invariably seep into your work. It happens, it’s called being human.  This is an area the eastern world understands better about human nature than the we do.  The idea that the political, religious, moral, and professional  aspects of our lives can simply be categorized and filed away based upon circumstance and the task at hand is simply ridiculous.  We are human beings and our beliefs ought to inform our actions.  We ought to do what we think is right and we ought to be able to say that without fear of reprisal by folks of a different persuasion.

That’s the beauty of America when it works best.

The remaining question, as it pertains to journalists, is whether their views (due to the fact they are typically more educated and have more access to information than average folks) ought to be the standard, or whether, as journalists, they ought to seek more information, even from sources they consider inferior.

The remaining question, as it pertains to all of us, is whether our views of one another are big enough and generous enough to make way for others.

let the healing begin

Good morning.  Happy Monday.

It appears that the most viewed and discussed item on my blog thus far is the American Naivete piece from last week. So I thought I’d offer a deeper inspection of one segment.

In the piece, I mentioned the political climate.  One could make an argument that the particular era in which we exist is the most politically charged and/or negative in history.  One could also make the argument our political climate is so awash in political correctness that we are afraid to say anything we actually mean for fear of reprisal.  I tend to think it’s a little of both…

I grew up in solidly conservative, but very thoughtful and practical, intellectual environment.  Mom, from a working-class family of yellow-dog-democrats, dad from a working class family of limited-government-republicans.  They met while each pursued Political Science degrees from the University of Colorado (not exactly a bastion of conservative thought) and worked in journalism until dad got his law degree.

When I was still quite young, dad went into politics, so I’ve been involved (tagging along canvasing neighborhoods, handing out fliers, being in political radio and tv ads, being in interviews and around them, going to the caucuses and the state conventions, et al)  So I’ve seen it for a long time – close to 30 years.

In that time I’ve seen a lot of reactionary thinking and action.  But at home in conversations with my parents, and thoughtful folks like them, I always received balance.  My parents did a fantastic job of teaching me how to see both sides of an argument, and thus the perspective of the people on both sides of the discussion.

With that in mind I offer one small piece of wisdom.  It is vitally important, in matters of faith, politics, etc., to remain open to people.  It is perfectly appropriate to critique a mode of thought, a political ideology, a candidates views or record, a particular philosophical viewpoint on governance.  In other words, ideas, systems, ideologies & matters of record are all firmly on the table of discourse.

However, people, their hearts, candidate’s families, their intellectual capacity or lack thereof, ought to be strictly off the table.

In other words, it’s of the utmost importance, if we have any sort of hope for a shared future, a reconciled America, or a functional community, to respect one another enough to be kind.  We can always disagree, although it’s been said that critique is the lowest form of intellectual activity.  It’s easy to find holes in a system or set of ideas, what’s difficult – and more worth the effort – is to find ways to come together to patch those holes.

It is in this coming together to solve problems that we can be and are at our best.  Unity, is not afterall a goal to be sought after, but a natural biproduct of having a singular purpose.  If our goal is honestly to make our nation, and our communities better, and not simply to bash the other party, then the unity part comes naturally if we’ll let it.