“Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.”
—Mark Twain
The dissemination of news from institutions to the public, once trustworthy, has transitioned into the biased rhetoric of those with platforms. The loss of objectivity in the media has evolved over centuries, with technological advancements in communications serving as their catalyst.
It is not the loss of objectivity that irks me; it is the denial of bias. Objectivity contradicts human nature. We do not see the world through rose-colored glasses. On the contrary, our intrinsic filters of personal bias skew our view. These filters blur objective reality and transform truthful certainty into existential doubt. Our environment, life experiences, successes, failures, and the influence others have had upon us establish our “objectivity” in our assumptive world.
Loss of objectivity is not the problem. The problem is the false claim of objectivity by those with power, influence, and a platform from which to broadcast their opinions. Data and facts are easily manipulated to support pre-existing beliefs.
The solution is actually quite simple. Confess your partiality, give us your opinion, and move on.
What is a fact?
From an etymological perspective, “fact” (from the Latin term, factum) refers specifically to a completed task or deed. So, for example, “the sun set last night” is a fact. “The sun will rise tomorrow” is not a fact. Yet we can agree that the sun will rise tomorrow.
Today, we use the term “fact” to describe “a thing known to be true,” even if it has not yet happened. The question is, who gets to decide what is known to be true?
Case and point: It was a fact that Pluto was officially a planet, until the International Astronomical Union decided on August 24, 2006, that it was actually a “dwarf planet.”
We delegate our news media, politicians, pundits, and children with the task of distinguishing fact from fantasy and objectivity from opinion. We must understand their interpretation of the message, and the objective of the messenger.
In 1964, Marshall McLuhan postulated that “The medium is the message.” He theorized that the means in which information is dispersed determines the perception of the message, fundamentally manipulating human thought, action, and interaction. Different delivery mechanisms have different effects on the impartiality of a message. The audience’s reaction to a message received by newsprint is influenced by the writer’s style, font, and placement on the page. The same message delivered by radio is manipulated by the pitch, volume, rate, and resonance of the broadcaster. A television address is swayed by the appearance, attire, facial expressions, body language, and the newscaster’s surroundings. According to McLuhan, factors peripheral to the message have more influence than its content.
Loss of objectivity is not the problem. The problem is the false claim of objectivity by those with power, influence, and a platform from which to broadcast their opinions.
Observed in every new generation are the benefits of technological advancements in mass communications. Innovative breakthroughs have the common goal of imparting information quickly and efficiently to larger audiences. The unintended consequences are the ease at which mass distribution of misinformation and disinformation can be dispersed.
While populations strive to obtain objective information, institutions strive to influence and persuade the masses. In 59 B.C.E., Julius Caesar distributed postings of information in public places. Although Caesar’s declarations were sacrosanct, objectivity was not his intent. In medieval England, the lack of objectivity among kings was designed to consolidate control in pursuit of personal glory.
In grade school we were taught the “fact” that, in 1430, Johann Gutenberg’s introduction of the movable type printing press introduced mass dissemination of printed information. Although his breakthrough was indeed remarkable, long before Gutenberg’s birth, Bì Shēng in China developed movable type printing techniques made from baked clay, completing the whole set of character blocks by 1048. Metal movable type originated in Korea. A collection of Zen Buddhist teachings, the Jikji, was published and widely distributed long before Gutenberg began churning out Bibles. The correct answer in grade school to the printing press question was Guttenberg. Was this an objective interpretation of history, or the biased favoring of Western civilization’s accomplishments while suppressing those of Asian influence? When Gutenberg’s Bible was mass produced, the information it presented was promoted as objective and factual. Four centuries later, Charles Darwin bravely questioned the objectivity of Creationism, theorizing evolution as an alternative. More than two centuries earlier, Galileo’s heliocentric model questioned the objectivity of the established doctrine based on Biblical interpretation. As a result of these two outliers, faith-based objective factuality was transformed into scientific skepticism.
Two centuries after Gutenberg, the “printing revolution” was initiated in Antwerp with the first distribution of a weekly newspaper. By 1729, Benjamin Franklin’s Pennsylvania Gazette was mass produced. Objectivity was not his intent. He published a smorgasbord of personal viewpoints, using his platform to shape public opinion and promote political causes. But these were not hidden agendas.
Rapid distribution of mass-printed information was delayed by the arduous nature of transportation. In America, the Pony Express carried newspapers with an express delivery time of 10 days, pending no unforeseen natural disasters or intervention by outlaws.
In 1917, Ford introduced his first official delivery truck easily adaptable to newspaper delivery. Unfortunately, his preferred newspaper was the Dearborn Independent.
In 1920, Ford published The International Jew: The World’s Foremost Problem. Circulated under the delusion of fact and objectivity, his sources included the anti-Semitic Protocols of the Elders of Zion and The New International Encyclopedia. Ford’s work was translated into 12 languages and was available throughout America and Europe. His intended consequence of inflaming anti-Semitism globally disguised as objectivity and fact was a success.
In 1923, the American Society of Newspaper Editors issued its Code of Ethics or Canons of Journalism. It states that “Sound practice makes clear distinction between news reports and expressions of opinion. News reports should be free from opinion or bias of any kind.” It goes on to declare that “A journalist who uses his power for any selfish or otherwise unworthy purpose is faithless to a high trust.”
In 1949, when news dissemination shifted from the written word to broadcasting, the FCC’s “Fairness Doctrine” was issued. This required licensed radio and television broadcasters to present balanced, contrasting viewpoints on controversial public issues, seeking to prevent broadcasters from using airwaves for one-sided agendas.
Throughout history, inventors have scrimmaged to overcome the problematic handicap of vehicle-driven news delivery. In 1886, Heinrich Hertz demonstrated the wireless transmission of electromagnetic waves. In 1895, Aleksandr Popov demonstrated a radio-wave receiver while Tesla and Marconi sparred over bragging rights for the invention of the radio. In 1901, radio broadcasts first crossed the Atlantic, and, in 1906, Reginald Fessenden enabled radio transmission of the human voice. In 1937, Samuel Morse introduced the Telegraph, followed almost immediately by 80% of U.S. households owning a radio.
In 1938, the CBS Radio Network aired Orson Welles’ radio adaptation of H. G. Wells’ The War of the Worlds. This landmark in media history demonstrated the disastrous effects of “fake news.” Listeners who tuned in late missed Welles’ introduction of his show as a classic work of science fiction. Without context, listeners heard a news report detailing a devastating alien invasion. The report featured a “live report” from a rooftop in Manhattan, describing citizens fleeing from poison smoke, until the “correspondent” coughs and falls silent. According to acclaimed producer, actor, and director John Houseman who witnessed the production and its aftermath, writing in his 1972 memoir Run-Through, “…millions of people accepted it—emotionally if not logically.”
When deceitful broadcasters lacking both objectivity and truth, use their platform to declare that President Trump is Hitler, and ICE agents are the Gestapo, is it any surprise that they get attacked, run over by trucks, and shot at?
Meanwhile, during the advent of radio, television systems were being dreamed of. In 1926, John Baird demonstrated the first working black and white television. Philo Farnsworth demonstrated the first electronic television system in 1927, and Vladimir Zworykin contributed his “Iconoscope” camera tube in 1930. In 1953, industry-standard color television broadcasting began in America.
In 1960, the first televised presidential debate, Kennedy vs. Nixon, was aired to 65 million viewers. Their messages were altered by the merriment of this milestone in mass communication. Those who listened to the radio were more likely to vote for Nixon. Those who watched the debates on television were more likely to vote for Kennedy, resulting in Kennedy’s razor-thin win of 0.2% in the popular vote.
As a 1973 Mass Communications Major at the City University of New York’s Queens College, my studies were designed to prepare me to “Research, create, and distribute information to large, diverse audiences through various media channels like television, radio, and journalism.”
And then came 24-hour news.
“Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.”
—Aldous Huxley
CNN was launched in 1980, breaking the traditional, scheduled news model of ABC, CBS, and NBC. CNN’s 24‑hour TV news format placed increasing pressure on their anchors to fill the airtime. So, logically, they filled it with opinions.
In 1987, the FCC repealed the Fairness Doctrine, removing the legal requirement to present balanced views on controversial issues.
In 1996, both MSNBC and Fox News took to the airways. These stations, like CNN before them, originally aimed for neutrality and impartiality, blending technology, traditional news, and objectivity. All networks gradually shifted from news to opinion programming, some to the right and most to the left, as polarization of television news became the norm.
And then came the Internet.
In 1990, Tim Berners-Lee invented the World Wide Web, introducing the immediate dissemination of information to a limitless audience. A decade later, by incorporating technology invented and patented by Jewish Heddy Lamar, along with composer George Antheil, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and GPS were introduced.
And here we are, in the Digital Age of Internet-enabled interactive, instantaneous, and viral transmission of information. The Internet provides disingenuous individuals with the ability to disseminate their opinions disguised as fact in an immediate fashion with no limit to audience size.
In cyberspace, individuals form and join groups, panels, interactive podcasts, and massive virtual communities. TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, X (previously Twitter), and others place insurmountable pressure on the malleable minds of our youth.
In social psychology, “pluralistic ignorance” is defined as the collective delusion in which people mistakenly believe that others predominantly hold an opinion different from their own. This results in members of a group going along with a view they do not hold because they think (incorrectly) that most other people in the group hold it. Many Americans who supported President Trump publicly condemned him in public due to pluralistic ignorance. Polls showed Harris to be the clear favorite. Yet, when no one was watching, Trump scored a decisive victory.
Hans Christian Andersen’s fairy tale The Emperor’s New Clothes demonstrates the power of pluralistic ignorance. In the story, two con artists claim to make the finest clothes for their Highness. These garments are so special that they are invisible to those unworthy. Out of fear of being judged, the emperor’s court and townspeople remain silent about seeing nothing. The story presents the danger of ignoring reality due to fear of social pressure or authority. It serves as a cautionary tale of the dangers of blind obedience.
“When you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.”
—Mark Twain
Pluralistic ignorance is closely related to “mob psychology” which involves individuals in a group losing their self-awareness and adopting the collective irrational behavior of the crowd. Pluralistic ignorance and mob psychology involve fear of social exclusion, leading to conformity. Both situations cause individuals to act against their own best judgment, allowing false norms to persist. Mob psychology was recently exemplified when a band of violent protestors, equipped with tactical gear and weapons, attacked a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s facility in Texas, shooting a local law enforcement officer in the process. Depending on the bias of the networks, some condemned the incident as heinous, while other recognized it as “understandable.”
Most adults still depend on television as our main source of breaking news and historical events. The objectivity of the presenter is determined by their assumptive world. The validity of the information provided to us is contingent upon the honesty, integrity, and the sincerity of the messenger’s attempt to be impartial.
Before we process and share the information we receive, we must know the messenger to understand their message. With a bit of skepticism, cynicism, source checking, and logic, we can separate fact from fiction.
While disingenuous influencers and malicious bots become more sophisticated and sinister, our naïve, gullible youth rely on cyberspace for awareness of current events and confirmation of historical happenings. According to a Pew Research Center survey, most teenagers use social media and nearly half say they’re online almost constantly.
Facebook, Instagram, X, TikTok, and others were not intended to be reliable sources of objectivity and factuality. They are entertainment media, not news media. Facebook was designed for college students to communicate privately with “friends.” Instagram was a way to connect people who travel, by way of “check-ins”; Twitter (now “X”) was a message service for quick status updates; and TikTok was a dance-centric lip-syncing platform for teenagers (despite being created by communist China). Sadly, they have evolved into contentious cesspools of purulent propaganda, fabricators of fake news, and goldmines of gossip.
We have the responsibility of at least trying to guide our children into a life of objectivity, honesty, ethics, and morality. Don’t expect Facebook, the government, or their teachers to do our job for us.
