1 of 1- Goose
- Cogito ergo sum
Offline 
- Registered: 1/29/2015
- Posts: 13,427
The Problem of False Balance
False balance, in the way I mean the term, refers to the flawed journalistic impulse to give each side of an argument equal time and weight regardless of each side’s relative standing to facts and truth. False balance is a hallmark of bad journalism, and the unmerited elevation of crackpots’ bad opinions is a hallmark of false balance. I do not mean to suggest that an unpopular opinion is necessarily a bad one. Popular history is rife with Galileo situations where lone truth tellers are thwarted by establishment forces. But Jeffrey Lord is not one of these people. Jeffrey Lord is a marginal gadfly who was free to appear on CNN so often because he literally had nothing else to do.
Firing Jeffrey Lord Doesn’t Fix CNN’s Jeffrey Lord Problem
He was only the most obnoxious embodiment of false balance at the network.
Jeffrey Lord is a political hack and shameless troll who spent the past two years wasting America’s time on CNN as one of the world’s dumbest and most slavishly pro-Trump pundits. He appeared regularly on CNN’s political programming as one of Donald Trump’s chief water-bearers, playing the part so well that Anderson Cooper once felt compelled to note—on air!—that Trump could defecate on his desk and Lord would defend it. Cooper’s crude observation was wholly accurate: Lord’s only qualifications for being on television were his readiness to applaud even Trump’s most noxious moments and the fact that he already owned a suit.
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
As the New York Times reported in April, Lord first came to CNN’s attention in 2015, when the network was having trouble finding anyone—literally anyone—who would defend Trump’s then–long shot candidacy on TV. At that point, Trump’s bilious rhetoric hadn’t been validated by any primary wins, and no credible person was willing to risk his or her reputation to support a polarizing bigot with no evident path to victory.
According to the Times, this didn’t stop Trump from whining to CNN “that his interviews on the network were always followed by conversations among panelists who all seemed to hate him.” CNN’s response was classic:
The network asked Trump to suggest the names of some people who would defend him. One of those whom he mentioned was Jeffrey Lord.
So, to summarize, after Donald Trump complained to CNN that the network wasn’t being nice enough to him, CNN responded not just by letting him propose some people who would be nice to him, but by actually putting one of them on television ad nauseam. It’s sad but not surprising. If CNN’s political-commentary programming stands for anything, it is for cheerful acquiescence to the demands of the powerful in the name of false balance.
False balance, in the way I mean the term, refers to the flawed journalistic impulse to give each side of an argument equal time and weight regardless of each side’s relative standing to facts and truth. False balance is a hallmark of bad journalism, and the unmerited elevation of crackpots’ bad opinions is a hallmark of false balance. I do not mean to suggest that an unpopular opinion is necessarily a bad one. Popular history is rife with Galileo situations where lone truth tellers are thwarted by establishment forces. But Jeffrey Lord is not one of these people. Jeffrey Lord is a marginal gadfly who was free to appear on CNN so often because he literally had nothing else to do.
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
The problem with Jeffrey Lord wasn’t that he was awful. It was that CNN didn’t care he was awful—or, rather, that CNN said, Our political programming will not be complete until we find an analyst who is really, really awful, and then put him on air constantly in the name of “balance.” This impulse is the most insidious form of, yes, fake news: cable networks’ habit of hiring superficially articulate frauds and fakers to interpret the news, in the process falsely equating their bad opinions with informed people’s good ones and creating a space where nothing means anything and fame is equated with moral standing. Lord spent two years disguising his advocacy as analysis and cashing CNN’s paychecks in the process, and CNN was all too happy to let him do it. Now he’s gone, but not really, because there is an endless supply of Jeffrey Lords out there. There is no real escape. We will never be saved.
We live in a time in which decent and otherwise sensible people are surrendering too easily to the hectoring of morons or extremists.
- tennyson
- Exchanger
Offline
- Registered: 2/06/2015
- Posts: 6,654
Re: The Problem of False Balance
Balance is good IF BOTH sides have a valid point.
Balance must also be able to be borne out with facts from both sides.
"Do not confuse motion and progress, A rocking horse keeps moving but does not make any progress"
- Goose
- Cogito ergo sum
Offline
- Registered: 1/29/2015
- Posts: 13,427
Re: The Problem of False Balance
I've been observing the detrimental effects of this false balance for some time.
A favorite example is the early coverage of climate change, before the idea became almost universally accepted.
News outlets - with the goal of being "balanced" - would put one guy at a desk who accepted that climate change was occurring alongside a guy who was a denier. (Often they were political operatives rather than scientists) The two of them would recite talking points for about 90 seconds, and that would be it. News outlets would feel that they had done their jobs by presenting both sides. Mission accomplished.
They did this with good intentions. They didn't want to be accused of telling people what to think.
However, the press failed in their basic mission, which is to inform the public. The average person would come away from these little shouting matches ignorant of the fact that the evidence strongly favored the theory of climate change. To them it looked like a 50-50 thing. Two guys, two possibilities.
The core mission of the press is to inform the public.
If there is absolutely no evidence that thousands of New Jersey Muslims celebrated 9-11, just say so. Don't go out and find a nut job to make excuses for Trump under the guise of being "fair".
If the overwhelming preponderance of evidence supports the theory of climate change, say so. Don't go out and devote equal time to a nut. Don't dignify the ridiculous.
2+2 = 5 is not a side.
It is a denial of reality
Last edited by Goose (8/13/2017 10:51 am)
We live in a time in which decent and otherwise sensible people are surrendering too easily to the hectoring of morons or extremists.
- •
Thread Starter