Lessons of Our History
The past few months we examined cases where historical records may be contradictory, flawed or inaccurate. Was George Custer a tragic hero or reckless ego-maniac? If Pat Garrett killed Billy The Kid, why do we have a one hundred thirty year old controversy? Was the Grant presidency as corrupt as history portrays; or might the historical record be politically biased? History is a prismatic lens through which we view the past as seen by those who record it. Things may not always be as they are reported.
We learn historical lessons in hindsight. If you stop and think about it though, slanted or distorted records that became ‘history’, weren’t hindsight at the time they were first reported. The reports themselves were biased, flawed or just plain wrong. When that happens, the fragile lessons of history become misreported or lost. In the past, these occurrences tended to be isolated mistakes; or someone’s wishful thinking slipping into the historical record. Future generations were left to deal with the effects of misreporting or inaccuracies.
In the nineteenth century history was reported and recorded by the printed word. Today history is reported and recorded by a twenty-four-hour, mass-media news-cycle. Once again, things may not always be as they are reported. We see example after example of reporting that is selective, slanted or simply not true. If these reports become our history, one wonders what lessons our history will offer those who follow us in generations to come. What will they learn from records that are biased or false? What lessons will be lost for being selectively ignored?
There are some bedrock principles in play here. Our constitution ensures the rights of a free press. Rights come with responsibilities. Journalistic ethics profess to take these responsibilities seriously. The ethical standards professional journalism sets for itself raise a high bar. The Society of Professional Journalists promotes a Code of Ethics. You can find it at www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp. The preamble states:
“Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. Ethical Journalism strives to ensure the free exchange of information that is accurate, fair and thorough. An ethical journalist acts with integrity.”
“Justice and the foundation of democracy,” make for serious stuff. The code goes on at length and specificity to elaborate on the meaning of journalistic ethics and the behaviors the code expects of ethical journalists. It would be amusing if it weren’t so sad. Today we are surrounded by examples of journalists and media outlets who don’t seem to take journalistic responsibilities or ethics seriously at all. The news is less reported than editorialized to suit a particular ideology or worldview. What happened to “Accurate, fair . . . thorough” and I’ll add ‘truthful’ journalism? It’s become ‘group-think’ talking-points.
Popular culture gives lying a pass. We’ve institutionalized deceit as an accepted form of discourse. We parse phrases, spin words, shade meaning and bias questions to favor a desired answer or ‘Optic’. In some cases we are fed outright lies without the slightest fear of repercussion because mass media has become mass-think. Reporters use talking-point templates featuring buzz words that appear in every story regardless of outlet. I read a story not long ago reported in a half dozen different outlets. Every one used the word ‘gravitas’. When was the last time you used gravitas in a sentence? Some ‘coincidence’. In a more subtle and devious deceit, undesirable truth is simply ignored.
The problem isn’t confined to journalists either, though in most cases journalists are the great enabler of deceits by those they were once charged to oversee. If some statement or allegation suits a journalist’s worldview, it goes into the media megaphone without question. Elected officials, business leaders, celebrities and even educators engage in slanted, biased and less than truthful practices. They do so with impunity whenever their distortions suit the popular or desired ideology. The intrepid purveyor of unpopular truth or a contradictory viewpoint is systematically demonized or destroyed.
Taken together we are left with a culture of deceit. We have devalued truth in our society and our history with it. In doing so we abandon truthful lessons of history and the value future generations might take from them. I’ve used these quotes before. They bear repeating.
George Santayana observed: Those who ignore the lessons of history, are destined to repeat them.
George Orwell famously said “Who controls the past, controls the future.”
Orwell might also have said ‘Who controls the present, controls the future.’
“Justice and the foundation of democracy” make for serious consequences.
https://www.amazon.com/author/paulcolt
Ride easy,
Paul
We learn historical lessons in hindsight. If you stop and think about it though, slanted or distorted records that became ‘history’, weren’t hindsight at the time they were first reported. The reports themselves were biased, flawed or just plain wrong. When that happens, the fragile lessons of history become misreported or lost. In the past, these occurrences tended to be isolated mistakes; or someone’s wishful thinking slipping into the historical record. Future generations were left to deal with the effects of misreporting or inaccuracies.
In the nineteenth century history was reported and recorded by the printed word. Today history is reported and recorded by a twenty-four-hour, mass-media news-cycle. Once again, things may not always be as they are reported. We see example after example of reporting that is selective, slanted or simply not true. If these reports become our history, one wonders what lessons our history will offer those who follow us in generations to come. What will they learn from records that are biased or false? What lessons will be lost for being selectively ignored?
There are some bedrock principles in play here. Our constitution ensures the rights of a free press. Rights come with responsibilities. Journalistic ethics profess to take these responsibilities seriously. The ethical standards professional journalism sets for itself raise a high bar. The Society of Professional Journalists promotes a Code of Ethics. You can find it at www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp. The preamble states:
“Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. Ethical Journalism strives to ensure the free exchange of information that is accurate, fair and thorough. An ethical journalist acts with integrity.”
“Justice and the foundation of democracy,” make for serious stuff. The code goes on at length and specificity to elaborate on the meaning of journalistic ethics and the behaviors the code expects of ethical journalists. It would be amusing if it weren’t so sad. Today we are surrounded by examples of journalists and media outlets who don’t seem to take journalistic responsibilities or ethics seriously at all. The news is less reported than editorialized to suit a particular ideology or worldview. What happened to “Accurate, fair . . . thorough” and I’ll add ‘truthful’ journalism? It’s become ‘group-think’ talking-points.
Popular culture gives lying a pass. We’ve institutionalized deceit as an accepted form of discourse. We parse phrases, spin words, shade meaning and bias questions to favor a desired answer or ‘Optic’. In some cases we are fed outright lies without the slightest fear of repercussion because mass media has become mass-think. Reporters use talking-point templates featuring buzz words that appear in every story regardless of outlet. I read a story not long ago reported in a half dozen different outlets. Every one used the word ‘gravitas’. When was the last time you used gravitas in a sentence? Some ‘coincidence’. In a more subtle and devious deceit, undesirable truth is simply ignored.
The problem isn’t confined to journalists either, though in most cases journalists are the great enabler of deceits by those they were once charged to oversee. If some statement or allegation suits a journalist’s worldview, it goes into the media megaphone without question. Elected officials, business leaders, celebrities and even educators engage in slanted, biased and less than truthful practices. They do so with impunity whenever their distortions suit the popular or desired ideology. The intrepid purveyor of unpopular truth or a contradictory viewpoint is systematically demonized or destroyed.
Taken together we are left with a culture of deceit. We have devalued truth in our society and our history with it. In doing so we abandon truthful lessons of history and the value future generations might take from them. I’ve used these quotes before. They bear repeating.
George Santayana observed: Those who ignore the lessons of history, are destined to repeat them.
George Orwell famously said “Who controls the past, controls the future.”
Orwell might also have said ‘Who controls the present, controls the future.’
“Justice and the foundation of democracy” make for serious consequences.
https://www.amazon.com/author/paulcolt
Ride easy,
Paul
No comments have been added yet.
