First it was the nightly weather, then the finance report and now it’s politics. There is a creeping conspiracy in television news of people standing in front of charts, taking the daily temperature – of meteorology, of markets and of members of parliament – and trying to persuade us that it all means something.
So an unseasonably cool early autumn day is enough to disprove the existence of man-made climate change, or a two per cent shift in an index presages a new bull/bear market or every five-point downward shift in an political leader’s poll rating means a caucus challenge is inevitable. The media are inherently impatient, chronically innumerate and because of ever tightening deadlines and ever diminishing resources, dangerously ready to extrapolate a one-day or one-month wonder into a long-term trend.
The great untold story of the news business is that it largely consists of passing off the transitory as the permanent, the ephemeral for the everlasting and the faddish for the forever. This mentality is quite understandable among journalists themselves for whom anything more than 24 hours ahead is the long-term. (Actually, in radio, wires and online media, anything beyond the next half hour is the distant future.)
It’s something the public needs to keep in mind when sitting down to watch the television news at night (assuming of course people still do that in this age). Because for many journalists, every day is a new day and each event exists independently of what came before. So in the constant obsession with the new, context and perspective become collateral damage.
While short-termism has always been a professional hazard for those who work in the news media, the problem has become much more intense in recent years under a general ratcheting up of deadline and commercial pressures and amid the online commodification of the who-what-where-when news that was once the bread-and-butter of the nightly television bulletin.
Alongside this sense of a compression of time has been a shift away from qualitative to quantitative factors in news assessment. So as time pressures have increased, and as resources have been cut, journalists are being asked to say something meaningful about subjects driven by numbers – whether it be climate change, financial markets or political opinion polling. And it’s fair to say that for most journos, maths is not a strong suit. Neither is their facility with new media. When you add that to their deadline-driven impatience with complexity or nuance, you have a pretty good recipe for misleading the public.
This problem was neatly highlighted by the invaluable Possum last year when the Auditor General’s report exposed the beat-up that was the media mantra over the BER “waste” (and, earlier, the Pink Batts “scandal”). The actual numbers were totally at odds with the accepted media narrative, but the facts simply didn’t matter or where deemed just too darned esoteric to bore the audience with.
This institutionalised innumeracy is rather unfortunate and perhaps explains why an experienced journalist like Barrie Cassidy, appearing on a taxpayer-funded public broadcaster, can just sit mute as one of Rupert Murdoch’s professional trolls is paid to come on the Insiders program and spray deliberate mistruths to support a far right political agenda.
And you could see it last year in the gullibility of some (not all – honourable mention to Ian Verrender) of the financial media in giving credence to numbers provided by multi-national miners to beat off a government attempt to secure a better return for taxpayers from finite and publicly owned resources.
Most of all you can see it in the usual suspects wetting themselves over the latest Newspoll without pointing out to their viewers and listeners that Howard was in a similar position as Gillard is now in his first term. And reminding them that in any case the election is still more than two years away and today’s poll will soon be a distant memory.
Perhaps it’s time for our media bosses to slow things down, take a deep breath, send a few journos off to short courses in statistical analysis (or point them here) and reacquaint themselves with some old fashioned concepts like, oh, respect for the facts and context, a real regard for the reader and viewer and an appreciation of what things mean beyond the 24-hour news/noise cycle. Too much to expect?
18 Comments
The Worst of Perth · March 14, 2011 at 12:31 PM
But is it fixable? Can there be a way back? Seems impossible to imagine it can be turned around. Maybe a mute rolling display of images, tsunamis, earthquakes, stocks graphs, celebrity binges, over the top of which we can all bray our own commentary, attempting to drown out the competing commentaries of spouses, children and whoever else is in the room
Seriously, I have taken to writing my own news. It's so much better.
http://asiabeat.wordpress.com/
Funsky · March 14, 2011 at 1:46 PM
Great point being made here. In the hustle and bustle of sensationalism and deadlines, most commercial channel journalists have compromised on their professionalism and exposed their statistical illiteracy. The Pink Batts 'scandal' is a great example of failing to deliver actual news instead if being driven by the 'Abbotron'* opposition exaggeration (and passing it off as something newsworthy).
*”Abbotron” is the robotic machinery designed and operated by the Opposition. It's sole objective is to mindlessly and amorally obstruct, obsfuse, destroy or other oppose government decisions or policies…in absolute disregard to its merits.
Funsky · March 14, 2011 at 1:48 PM
Other = otherwise
Anonymous · March 14, 2011 at 7:07 PM
On a couple of related matters …
Blog posts about the latest disgraceful episode of Onesiders:
Pure Poison – Aunty, we have a problem.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/purepoison/2011/03/14/aunty-we-have-a-problem/
The Political Sword – The Day News Limited Took Over Our ABC
http://www.thepoliticalsword.com/post/2011/03/14/The-Day-News-Limited-Took-Over-Our-ABC.aspx
___
On QandA, even Dennis Shanahan thinks Their ABC has gone too far with the politicking …
The Australian, 15 March 2011:
“ABC’s ambush a travesty of politics and news reporting
” The ABC has gone too far – for a publicly funded, so-called even-handed public broadcaster, last night’s Q&A ambush of Julia Gillard was a travesty of politics and news reporting.
[…]
” Last night the ABC pre-arranged for Julian Assange, accused of crimes in Sweden and sought for political havoc in the US, to accuse the Australian Prime Minister of “treason”.
” While Gillard kept a good-humoured face on what was happening, the ABC organised for Assange, who has been helped by the government in his court cases, to appear on a video to make his accusation. The program then backed up the WikiLeaks “anarchist” with questions from outside and the studio audience.
” Watching the Prime Minister cop a pasting from the snow-haired Australian after she defended whistleblowers was as alarming as watching the former prime minister dodging footwear live on air.
” The ambush of Gillard, with no warning from the program, which claims to provide unscripted questions from “you” the audience, was worse television terrorism than the Seven Network’s “shit happens” ambush of Tony Abbott by Mark Riley.
[…]
” At a time when the national broadcaster can’t even competently report on a 24-hour basis on the major disaster in Japan, the time spent “setting up” Gillard was a disgrace.”
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/abcs-ambush-a-travesty-of-politics-and-news-reporting/story-fn59niix-1226021429347
___
And how's this for a political headline piece by an ABC employee …
The key is consistency, Labor is lacking
By Annabel Crabb
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/03/11/3161735.htm?site=thedrum
Luke Buckmaster · March 14, 2011 at 9:27 PM
Sadly, yes, it is too much to expect given our current media landscape. Another insightful and thoughtfully written story, Denmore.
Anonymous · March 14, 2011 at 11:28 PM
Mr Denmore, there might be 'institutionalised innumeracy' in journalism but you'll never get journalists to admit it. When I first joined the Federal Press Gallery, I was gob-smacked at the (usually) Tuesday morning, 9:30 stampede to grab and report the latest Bureau of Statistics figures. Reporters ran breathless to their offices and whipped up 'breaking news' on such esoteric things as the non-farm price deflator and the monthy CPI, seasonally adjusted etc, etc. To the average reader/listener/viewer, it meant very little, but that didn't stop them. Only when I asked why the non farm price deflator (for example) was important were they able to put it into words that either mattered to the general population or didn't. My favourite, though, was the constant rabbiting on about monetary and fiscal policy. No one appears to have thought about writing interest rates and government spending! My efforts to have my staff use such simple terms was met with strong resistance (although I finally prevailed). Of course, these were the Keating years and it was he who introduced econmoics to the mainstream. I'm sure the Press Gallery was simply trying to demonstrate that it understood what he was talking about. I doubt most members did (By the way, I long ago got a proper job).
drmick · March 15, 2011 at 2:03 AM
The “News” is the most popular entertainment on TV at the moment. There are more people watch versions of the same “news” than all the other programs put together.
The “News” is not the “news”, it is entertainment scripted and preened to keep you in your seat to watch the next program. It has nothing to do with “news”.
I am disgusted that the ABC has sunk lower than ratbag radio in its attempt to entertain. If it were reporting news, then it would have known that what they were asking the prime minister was rhetorical bullshit, and she should have told them that. She should also have put the abc in the same unmentionable category as gloria the queen of right wing radio onanism.
Brett · March 15, 2011 at 2:12 AM
Well written. Couldn't agree more. I'm so sick of reading “if an election was called today…” No, there won't be an election for at least two years, so why publish a new poll nearly every day?
I've lost count of how many times I've read how we're going it alone on a carbon tax. 42 countries have gone there before us, including the whole of Europe, even New Zealand, some countries have had it for many years and by all accounts it hasn't hurt people at all. But according to the media, we're the first, and it's unknown territory. As they say, you can have your own opinions, but not your own facts, but that doesn't seem to stop it happening.
Felix · March 15, 2011 at 3:06 AM
A society fed a diet of Paris Hilton’s and Charlie Sheen’s diary entries is hardly likely to notice any decline in journalists’ standards. Given that most journalists have a certain amount of amour-propre they find themselves competing for attention and are forced to colour and confect certain stories. It is easy to bruise the ego of a journalist and our pollies will pay the price when human nature swamps the need to report accurately. The fact that our Prime Minister is a female may also rankle with some of our male journalists.
I can’t see the point of highlighting the institutionalised innumeracy and the disregarding of facts by our journalists because our MPs don’t set a very good example and seem intent on their own beat-up concerning global warming and then need for a CO2 tax.
The best way to approach journalists from Team Left or Team Right is to dismiss their bias or don’t read or watch their blatherings.
Tony · March 15, 2011 at 3:21 AM
Thank god for SBS's nightly news bulletin. I wouldn't watch any of the others if you paid me for my time.
Pip · March 15, 2011 at 4:03 AM
“Tony said…
Thenk god for SBS's nightly news bulletin,”.
John Howard didn't think it was worth bothering to flood SBS with Murdochracy the way he did with the ABC.
Quipper · March 15, 2011 at 9:18 AM
Very insightful post (as usual). Keep up the good work.
Scott · March 15, 2011 at 10:17 PM
It would be a pretty thing to have the media owners concerned by the innumeracy of their employees, but the corporate owners know it makes no difference to their takings, and those are the numbers that really matter!
And an innumerate (and increasingly illiterate) journalist class is just perfectly suited to an innumerate and increasingly illiterate Australian population.
Anonymous · March 15, 2011 at 11:11 PM
I have just discovered your blog through this story. A wonderful piece and a brilliant blog.
As an ex journo who left the craft because of the increasing workload caused by a reduction in staff and the increasingtime needed to do a good job, I can see why the media is falling apart.
I also believe university has a role to play in the collapse.
Coming into print journalism from the ground up cannot be beaten when building great reporters. Working with gruff sub-editors, cranky section editors and the wonderful pedants from the old school who love language, demand facts and tighten every sentence was the best education I ever had.
They also bring a no bullshit perspective to the news which reaches across decades. That experience is sorely lacking in many subs rooms these days.
University is no replacement for learning on the job. It may even be a hindrance because so many bad habits have to be undone and young reporters have to be taught all over again from scratch.
Today most of them really want to be columnists as you can see by all the commentary that pops up in news reports.
Mike Hopkins · March 15, 2011 at 11:18 PM
And I notice in todays online edition of “The Age”, in their opinion section (National Times), there is a lead piece by Peter Costello,headlined “Wowing the US won't help PM at home”, and just below it a piece by Julie Bishop “What the government isn't telling you”. So now the Coalition seems to have taken over Fairfax as well as having Murdoch and the ABC in its pocket.
Anonymous · March 16, 2011 at 12:09 AM
“So now the Coalition seems to have taken over Fairfax as well as having Murdoch and the ABC in its pocket.”
___
Fascism, here we come.
David · March 16, 2011 at 2:33 AM
One thing that interests me is whether the ABC is gaining any extra audience out of its swing to the right? I did a long stint at ABC Radio in the 90s and found that it was largely left of centre, but the arguement was that it was only media organisation in that space – there was no shortage of right wing opinion.
Rolly · March 30, 2011 at 2:56 AM
@ David: I did a long stint at ABC Radio in the 90s and found that it was largely left of centre, but the arguement was that it was only media organisation in that space – there was no shortage of right wing opinion.
…and people seem unaware that they are paying considerably more for the “free-to-air” commercial right wing variety, than for the pinko version paid out of Commonwealth Government consolidated revenue.
There's a “great big tax”, added to the price of everything that you buy, that pays for advertising it in the various media.
And just who pulls the strings there??