Most people agree that actual facts matter in such activities as debate, discussion and reporting. Once facts are gathered, verified and distributed, informed decision-making can proceed in such important exercises as voting. But what happens when important, verified facts are published and broadcast widely, yet the resulting impact proves underwhelming – or even meaningless? If vital facts fail to affect the news audiences they intend to inform? This is the conundrum facing American journalism after 5 November 2024.
As a former journalist, and a scholar of media effects history, I know from both my experience and my research that even the most ethical and accurate reporting can have limited impact. Too often, critics and scholars assume that providing what they perceive to be the “right” information, while carefully policing “misinformation,” can solve the informational challenges in democratic governance. But reality is not that simple.
Historical examples abound of American news consumers being presented with verified facts about controversial figures or events, only to have the excellent journalism have little to no effect. In the run-up to the war in Iraq in 2003, for example, one newspaper chain distinguished itself with ethical, skeptical reporting on the reality of whether Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, as the Bush administration asserted. Despite their careful and accurate approach, there’s little evidence the reporters at Knight-Ridder convi.
