Fake news: it's not just for Jon Stewart anymore

There are three topics which get establishment media journalists all hot and bothered.

One is the myth of the liberal media, a fantasy so often repeated that some view it as self-evident.

One is blogs. The relationship between the mainstream media and the blogosphere should be seen as complementary, with each fulfilling a different role. But it's not surprising the watchdog bristles at being watched. As a result, too many mainstream media journalists view blogs with thinly veiled contempt. And many bloggers return the favor. It need not be that way.

But those are topics for another day.

The other issue mainstream media journalists, especially older ones, bemoan is how much young people rely on comedian Jon Stewart (in the past, it was David Letterman) for their news content. Stewart is the host of the Daily Show, a wildly popular (and excellent) satirical show which is self-desrcribed as 'fake news.'

They fume with their most self-righteous indignation about how this development signals the imminent collapse of the Republic. Of course, this is easier to do than asking WHY young people are ignoring the mainstream media for satirical TV shows, blogs, the Internet and other non-traditional news sources. This is easier than asking what those sources provide that establishment media outlets do not. Usually, grizzled media types will offer rationalizations about entertainment and attention span, excuses which are really more about not having to look in the mirror.

The fact of the matter is that blogs and the Internet raise issues that the mainstream media would prefer to ignore (see Monday's essay). Are these sources without fault? Absolutely not. But they provide points of view that the tightly controlled corporate media does not.

The fact of the matter is that Jon Stewart asks uncomfortable questions (albeit in a humorous way) about important issues that traditional reporters do not. In that sense, Stewart's news is more real than the real news.

Mainstream media journalists are first and foremost concerned with access. Asking uncomfortable questions can compromise that access. A few, like the gutsy Helen Thomas, are willing to risk it; most aren't.

Simply put, those in the alternative media may have far fewer resources but they have more freedom to take risks, more latitude to look for the real story.

But we're learning that the Daily Show hardly has a monopoly on fake news.

This piece from Alternet cites a new study by the Center for Media and Democracy. The study found found at least 77 TV stations around the country have aired corporate-sponsored video news releases over the past 10 months. The report accuses the TV stations of actively disguising the content, which has been paid for by companies like General Motors, Panasonic and Pfizer, to make it appear to be their own reporting.

[...]
The stations are scattered throughout 30 states and are affiliated with all of the major networks: ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox. And many of the stations are owned by some of the country's largest media companies, including Clear Channel, News Corp, Viacom, the Tribune Co. and Sinclair Broadcast.

The study by the Center for Media and Democracy is called "Fake TV News: Widespread and Undisclosed." The authors of the report charge that these TV stations actively disguise the corporate-sponsored content to make it appear to be their own reporting.

For all the huffing and puffing about the so-called 'Daily Show effect,' many traditional media outlets could learn a lot from the program. At least Stewart is ethical enough to admit that his news is fake.


Update: As one of my aquaintainces pointed out, "Those who are concerned that America's youth get's their news from this source are missing an important fact. Young people know that ALL news sources have an underlying agenda. Stewart is endearing because he tells us his agenda right off. That way he's more credible."