Jay RosenMar 11, 2023

Not the odds, but the stakes.

That's my shorthand for the organizing principle we most need among journalists covering the 2024 campaign.

Not who has what chances of winning, but the consequences for Americans and their democracy. What is likely to happen if... Again and again.

Not the odds, but the stakes.

#uspolitics #journalism #journalismus

Show threadCharles JohnsonMar 11, 2023
@jayrosen_nyu That’s a great way to frame the issue. But wouldn’t focusing on stakes involve value judgments? And aren’t most mainstream journalists taught to avoid judgments like the plague?
Show threadJay RosenMar 11, 2023

@Green_Footballs

I think that claim (We don't do value judgments) is weaker than ever, by which I mean it's less convincing to themselves, but, YES, sure, there are going to people in journalism who say that.

There are also more and more who say there are certain bedrock values that are basic to journalism.

For example, the Times’s new executive editor, Joe Kahn told David Folkenflik of NPR: “You can’t be committed to independent journalism and be agnostic about the state of democracy.”

Show threadKevin EganMar 12, 2023
@jayrosen_nyu @Green_Footballs I’m glad Joe Kahn spoke that truth, but The Times’ reliably awful continuation of both-sides coverage of politics and governing—particularly its refusal to apply words like “authoritarian” or “white supremacist” to many Republicans—suggests he doesn’t mean it, or else has no real idea how to act upon that belief.
Show threadJay Rosen

@kevingan

The Times has all sorts of problems with its political coverage. No argument.

"He doesn't mean it" is not the way I would put it. I think he was recognizing how convincing and widespead is the view that democracy can't be one of the things journalists are neutral about.

Whether he "means it" or not, he has admitted that the argument has won the day. There are limits to neutrality.

Most people who are critical of the Times don't agree with me that such admissions are significant.

Mar 12, 2023 at 12:56pmWeb
Show threadKevin EganMar 13, 2023

@jayrosen_nyu I never would have thought of that interpretation! You know far more about the context in which he works—or against which he labors?—than I ever will.

I’m still perplexed at how such an acknowledgment might be validated by actions. (As in the basic Pragmatist idea, “beliefs are rules for action.”)

Any overall movement by The Times towards a guiding maxim for political coverage like your excellent, “the stakes, not the odds”? I haven’t seen it. Not so far…