A time when truth does not matter

Most people agree that actual facts matter—in such activities as debate, discussion, and reporting.

- MICHAEL J SOCOLOW

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 convinced their bosses, their audiences, or national politicians that their eventually vindicated framing of the issues was more accurate than the sensational and eventually largely discredited stories in The New York Times. In retrospect, the facts were ignored, and misinformation disastrously informed the citizenry.

The question of journalistic quality and its impact or influence in current events has again arisen due to the election of Donald Trump.