When the media lives down to our expectations

I was a journalist for a couple of different periods, and they were two of the proudest professional experiences of my life. Not only did I enjoy being a journo, I enjoyed being surrounded (physically and online) by other journos… mostly better than me and almost all of them ethical, brave, fair and diligent providers of news.

I’ve often stood up for “the media” and journos because my genuine experience of it had been positive and inspirational with some of the best people I’ve met. In my opinion, sensationalism hasn’t been a very big part of regional journalism and is mainly evident as you climb a few rungs.

When I saw all of the gotcha journalism of the election, I found it very tough to stomach, and to keep holding the line and defending what they do. There is nothing wrong with asking tough questions or making politicians squirm, but (often L plate) journos taking cheap shots regarding inconsequential matters just for a sound bite … maybe at an editorial directive from their boss… or being confrontational just for the Jerry Springer of it all is just cheap theatre, not journalism.

On the weekend the SMH indulged in one of the tawdriest pieces of… I don’t know what you’d call it. It wasn’t news. But a journo at the SMH threatened to “out” Rebel Wilson if she didn’t give him a story within a two day time frame… and then had the nerve to be outraged that she took control of the narrative and didn’t submit to his blackmail.

We’re still doing this? Telling stories about consenting (and single) adults doing whatever the hell they like, harming no-one in the process?

The internet lit up and threw everything they had at the SMH. So editor Bevan Shields doubled down and said they had nothing to apologise for. Turns out internet peeps hadn’t thrown everything they had at the SMH and found a lot more… a LOT more… to throw.

Then, and only then, did the author and the journo take down the original story, admit that mistakes were made and did NOT offer an apology.

Firstly, with full transparency, I don’t like Bevan Shields. I worked with him for a while and trust me, I earned the right. But regardless of that… in two separate instances on the national stage… the train “strike” that was not a strike, and now this, utter hubris has prevented him from meeting the standard required of an editor, of the captain of the ship, in providing leadership and example, admitting he was wrong and apologising.

His half-arsed almost apology mentioned that lessons had been learned, but clearly they haven’t. And even international news services and TV shows have now covered stories mentioning the SMH by name, creating a stink that will take some time to remove.

I have long been a big-time fan of the SMH, but now it is an unrecognisable, unreliable rag… an empty shell of the great paper it was. It still contains many great journos, but now has become driven by sensationalism and pre-ordained narrative and I wonder how those writers can hang in there.

Journos and the media will never be popular. And that’s ok when they know in their hearts that they are doing good work… exposing matters that need to be brought to the light and shining a light on inspirational people and stories. Journos are often the first draft of history and the clarion call that uncovers wrongdoing. And they also cover community events and Aunt Gladys’s scones and that’s all bloody brilliant too.

But when they see the rubbish and bias that many of the lead news services have become, the practices that conform to everyone’s worst ideas of the media, and the news outlets which stick to a particular partisan political view, it gets tougher to feel proud of this great profession.