As a media critic and longtime journalist, I have serious worries about today’s news environment and its effect on democracy.
I’m concerned about corporate or chain ownership of news outlets that can skew the decision-making and priorities of media leaders. The bottom line seems to loom larger, at times, than tried-and-true journalistic standards do.
I’m concerned about declining trust in the press, which causes citizens to decide that they can’t believe anything they read or hear. That’s a dangerous situation for democracy, which must have truth as its firm foundation.
I’m concerned, too, that quality, fact-based journalism is not available to everyone because of the strict paywalls that many news organizations erect in order to earn revenue. By contrast, disinformation and lies flow all too freely on social media or through a new breed of so-called influencers or on sites that look like traditional news but are political operations.
As I followed the media coverage of the US elections, I couldn’t help but see these problems playing out in real time – resulting in false equivalence or normalization of extreme points of view.
I find far less to be worried about at the Guardian, and that’s part of why I’m proud to be a regular contributor here.
The Guardian has a different business model altogether. It is owned by the Scott Trust, not an individual billionaire, a media chain or a private-equity company. That independence, however, doesn’t mean it has free rein on spending; but it does mean that, so far, there is no strict paywall here. Readers are asked to contribute but they aren’t blocked from reading a story because they don’t have a subscription.
Contributions from readers are extremely important to the Guardian’s health and wellbeing. After decades in journalism, including 12 years as the top editor of a regional newspaper, I know very well how expensive it is to produce quality work. (I’ve also worked at the New York Times and the Washington Post.)
Journalists may need to spend months on an investigative project. They often need the support of lawyers, and they always need the watchful eyes of experienced editors. They may need to travel somewhere to get the story.
It all costs a lot. That’s why you read about so many layoffs at news organizations everywhere; the easiest way to fix financial problems is through reducing the ranks of journalists. But reporting is what makes a news organization worth your time.
As the Guardian US editor Betsy Reed often explains to readers, the Guardian really is different and that difference needs to be protected.
“It has never been clearer that media ownership matters to democracy. The Guardian is not billionaire-owned, nor do we have shareholders. We are supported by readers and owned by the Scott Trust, which guarantees our editorial independence in perpetuity. Nobody influences our journalism. We are fiercely independent and accountable only to you, our readers.”
Those are heartening words in this moment.
So, too, is a timely post-election statement from Katharine Viner, editor in chief of the Guardian, in which she rightly called Donald Trump a direct threat to freedom of the press.
“He has, for years, stirred up hatred against reporters, calling them an ‘enemy of the people’. He has referred to legitimate journalism as ‘fake news’ and joked about members of the media being shot. Project 2025, the blueprint for a second Trump presidency, includes plans to make it easier to seize journalists’ emails and phone records,” Viner said.
The Guardian will stand up to these threats, she continued, “but it will take brave, well-funded independent journalism”.
A lot of people I know are searching for how they, as individuals, can meet this troubled moment in history. One way to do that is to contribute to news sources that you find trustworthy and admirable. I hope you’ll agree with me that the Guardian should be high on that list.
