In Conversation with Clark Hoyt

Are the community newspapers doomed to extinction? Are the major newspapers truly objective or biased in their reporting? Are we really talking about “news” and not “newspapers” because the latter are past “the point of no return”? I met Clark Hoyt through our greatly respected mutual friend, Dr. William Winter, the former president of the American Press Institute (a client of mine for 20 years). Clark’s views on the news parallel mine as we both can readily recall Walter Cronkite, “the most trusted man in America,” who easily could have been elected president of the United States had he left the broadcast booth. We fondly recall Huntley and Brinkley saying good night to each other after their revered nightly broadcasts. But today we see the competition of a hugely polarized society seeking confirmation bias (and little else) on the internet. I raised doubts about the objectivity of reporting and separation of news and opinion in the New York Times, about which Clark strongly disagrees. He raises great points about not equally reporting non-scientific and invalid points, but we then discuss legitimate opposing views based on moral grounds and the implications of moral narcissism. His clarion call, however, is the loss of local news in the community—served today, when served at all, by weeklies—and the inability to learn of electric rate increases, school board actions, and who’s become an Eagle Scout. This can never be made up at regional or state or national levels, and we’re probably past the point of no return in trying to restore it. Listen to our largely agreeing but sometimes dissenting points and make up your own minds whether, as I quote in the opening, the newspaper can still serve as a “vaccine” against disinformation and rabid disagreement.

There are no comments yet.

Please log in to write the first comment.