Journalism and American Democracy

I have opinions, lots of them, on all sorts of things, from why Brazilian industrialization is lagging behind its predicted standards to how the game went last Saturday. I like talking, debating, and expressing these opinions, and this is why columnists always confound me. The fact there is a market for people to state their opinions, whereby you have no recourse or action but to take it in, has always struck me as odd. I have always wondered if people adopt the opinions themselves, thus surrendering part of their thinking to another, or if they do so to test their own thoughts on the matter against someone who, at least in theory, is seasoned. The latter I can at least partially understand, for in theory these are wise people, but the former seems undue surrender to me.

To extend this to a discussion of news generally, opinion pieces are pure interpretation. While they may contain facts, their purpose is not to provide those facts but opinions and analyses. This, I believe, places them squarely outside the definition of news, but that does not make them worthless. Analysis can serve as a textbook and whetstone, allowing people to see how analysis is done, see conclusions others draw, and finally to test their opinions against it and thus become sharper and more aware of a wider variety of thoughts. While one’s opinion must remain one’s own unless they wish to surrender sovereignty to some figure, whether politician or prophet or columnist, the opinions of a person who never contacts opposing thoughts becomes inbred in its ignorance.

As to the actual columns here, they’re interesting and right of center, but in general that seems a relatively safe position. Perhaps that is why they are popular, through mass appeal. After all, mildly conservative opinions are less likely to offend than mildly liberal ones, for while mild liberal ones call for small changes mildly conservative ones usually call for none. This is perhaps best exemplified in “The Principle at Stake at Notre Dame” where she basically avoids condemning abortion despite leaning that direction, and even in the end states she supports, to some degree, the current form it is in. I do not mean to say this is gutless, strong moderates have their own temptations to fight and their own deeply held belief, but it makes me wonder if we’re a right of center nation.

Kathleen Parker’s voice comes through strongly in each article reinforcing the feeling that you are talking about major world issues with someone who could be your best friend. Her honesty is something to be admired, especially when working in an industry that is not short on critics. But she maintains a lively and positive tone that much journalism is lacking. Her matter-of-fact attitude reinforces my belief that she has a logical point of view and goes a long way in securing people who agree with her points.

Writing as an opinion columnist seems to give her the freedom that journalists crave; her job allows her to go beyond objectivity and inspire people to really think about the issues in the news. As we have just wrapped up our conversation in class about the homogeneity that is becoming problematic in media, Parker’s essays offer a refreshing style. Her articles on the election grab my attention because they are separate from much of the election coverage that has begun to run together in my mind. Taking risks (labeling Mitt Romney a cyborg) and sharing her point of view freely (“No longer do we get what we pay for, as the adage goes. We get what the activists want—and we all pay for it,” wrote Parker in her article regarding MSNBC’s blatant favoritism of the incumbent president in their election coverage) Parker manages to win me over, and many others I’m sure.

Another factor that sets apart her journalism is the broad range of topics she covers. Ranging from politics to her family life to the abortion issue and its play at Notre Dame, she approaches each piece with a strong point of view that is backed up accordingly. Her voice comes through in each piece so we can tell that she is confident in her writing. I applaud her writing and her ability to show that subjective journalism is important and can have an impact on readers to inspire them as citizens just like standard journalism does.