I’ve been a journalist for nearly 30 years. Through those years, I heard the criticisms. You only write about bad stuff. Where’s the good news? You get it wrong. What’s your agenda?
 
That’s ok. True, I got into this business to write about sports, but life has a habit of carrying you in different directions. I found I enjoy opinion writing. I like to rattle cages, so I always looked at the criticism as part of the game.
 
Over time, as we became more polarized and less trustful of people who dealt in the information business — this includes not just journalists, but scholars, experts and scientists — the antagonism has become more vehement.
 
By the end of my time working in newsrooms, I found myself fearing for the safety of those I sent to cover certain events and topics. In the wake of the Capital Gazette, it became standard to have escape plans and codewords in newsrooms. More than once, I had to attempt to diffuse situations in the building.
 
The Coronavirus chaos has only served to highlight those divisions further — those who want information, and those who subscribe to conspiracies.
 
The latter argument, in short, is it’s all the media’s fault my bracket was prematurely busted. It’s impeachment 2.0. It sensationalized. It’s overblown. They just want to make the president look bad.
 
Admittedly, with a lack of coherent messaging, many of the reactions by leagues, businesses, governments and institutions seem almost draconian. I’m dialed in to current events, and I have unanswered questions. I understand the concept of “flattening the curve,” but I also understand the perceptionthis is too much, too fast. 
 
I’m an outlier. Many aren’t dialed in. They see these things in terms of their personal views — their personal bias. That’s not a knock, it’s reality. We’d like everyone to be good news consumers, but the fact of the matter is, most people don’t understand how to use the news, why they get what they get, and they don’t want to invest the time and effort to do so.
 
Journalism consumption isn’t easy. It can’t be spoon-fed. Reporters bust their tails to learn as much as they can about issues and synthesize that to an audience — to varying degrees of success. Often, it must be done quickly, which means things may need to be corrected later. And, multiple cuts in staff mean there are far, far fewer eyes reading that copy before it is place on a page or a website. 
 
That means the reader should applying their own filter. Not taking what they read as the gospel, but reading multiple stories. Multiple interviews with different experts, and from different points of view. Then form opinions on that research.
 
All the while, particularly in an evolving pandemic such as this, as events are canceled and as institutions close, as a matter or record, it is reported. 
 
Example: I stayed away from posting coverage of coronavirus specifically because I was waiting to see where it went. SARS, H1N1, Bird Flu, Swine Flu – we had seen many of these in the past, and the effect on our lives was minimal. 
 
My tact in covering the now pandemic changed, however, as it began to touch every corner of our lives. At that point, the news of the situation was the impact — closings and market fluctuations — as hundreds of league commissioners, governors, mayors, school superintendents and college presidents made sweeping decisions.
 
Reporting fact is not sensationalizing. It may be overwhelming, but that’s not on the journalist. It’s the record. If the consumer goes off the reservation and buys out all the TP, that’s not the fault of the reporting. There is a point where the personal responsibility of the consumer becomes a factor.
 
Complicating that issue, and contrary to what “news” consumers say, is no one is really interested in straight news. That’s why it isn’t profitable. People want opinion and analysis. If we (and by we, I mean society) really wanted dry news — just the facts — it would still dominate the market. It doesn’t. The evening lineups of our “news” networks are instead dominated by ideologues and entertainers. 
 
Today’s “news” consumer is not so much seeking information as they are seeking validation of that which they already believe. Anything that doesn’t mesh with their worldview is biased, or worse, agenda-based “fakenews.”
 
“News” networks are happy to oblige. After all, it’s all about ratings.  You want White House talking points? Fox has a lineup of folks happy to serve them up, and advertisers happy to cash in. And if you want the opposite, MSNBC is ready and waiting. Give the people what they want.
 
And, all too often in recent years, it trickles into print. Analysis that is often opinion masquerading as journalism.
 
None of this is new. Balanced journalism, as I have said many times in the past, is a relatively new development. Newspapers were always agenda-driven. The constitutional right of a free press was not based on objective reporting, it was based on the right to print inflammatory op-eds.
 
The trend of objectivity experienced in much of the second half of the 20thcentury is the abnormality. A luxury granted to an institution with a captive audience. When the consumer began to reassert control — television ratings, internet clicks —outlets had to respond to the demands of the market. Those that don’t disappear.
 
If consumers were clamoring for straight, hard news, Headline News would still be running headlines and not true crime programming. Nightly news would still be a must-see. Newspapers wouldn’t be withering on the vine. Consuming news is hard work, and quite frankly, “We” aren’t interested.
 
“We” want excitement. Sensationalism provides that. “We” want conflict. Opinion-based news gives us that. The networks are giving us what “We” want, because we are capitalists. “News” is a product that must be sold, not a public service. Take it from someone with almost three decades of experience in trying to be objective, you ain’t buyin’.
 
One result of that is a clouding of definitions. People throw around terms like “The Media,” “News” and “Journalism” is if they are synonymous. They are not. I think it is fair to say many of us have complaints about the media, but what it is delivering is not journalism. It is, however, responding to market demands, and the only thing that would change that is if we changed our behavior.
 
Play the blame game as we may, we get exactly "The Media" we deserve.

Why information — and true journalism — is important in a crisis.

The 1918 Influenza epidemic has always held fascination for me. Part of it is a great-great grandmother I have researched dies in it.

Have you ever wondered why it was called the Spanish Flu? Like may, you may have thought that is where it originated. In fact, no one has a definitive answer, though the first cases were reported in Kansas and spread as young soldiers headed to war.

The true reason for the moniker was the result of censorship. The Allied and Central Powers suppressed reports of the illness for morale reasons. Spain, a neutral power, thus became the source for in-depth reporting of the illness, in alarming detail as the population, all the way up to Spanish King Alfonso XIII, became infected.

Since countries under media blackout only received the news from Spanish sources, it was assumed Spain was ground zero, and the pandemic became commonly known as the “Spanish Flu” or the “Spanish Lady” in the United States and Europe.

Ironically, the Spanish, believing France to be the source, called it the “French Flu.”

What a wild week it has been since last checking in on Saturday.
 
The big story continues to be the coronavirus, the wild reactions to it by the sports, entertainment and business industries, or the lack thereof by the powers that be and many of their supporters.
 
Talk shows and sporting events in front of empty houses. The NBA suspending the league for the foreseeable future. Stores cleaned out of TP and supplies.
 
Obviously, the cancellation of sports is heartbreaking and disappointing, but the biggest effect (beyond the health implications, of course) is the volatility that has been introduced into the markets. We officially entered into a bear market Wednesday, when the market ended the day 20 percent down from its February high, and according to the Wall Street Journal, ended the longest-ever bull market in history. As I write this, trading is halted for the second time this week by an automatic safety valve.
 
Like crisis often do, we are united in our response. Riiiiiiight. Sadly, the days of working together toward a common enemy are in the past. Today’s responses are largely based on where you fall on the political spectrum.
 
Either the Administration is inept in its response or coronavirus is a scam developed to take down the president.
 
The enemy in the latter case? The media, of course.
 
OK, you got me. I have spent the last few weeks with my fellow journalists devising a false crisis to tear down civilization. The fact that you all can’t seem to stop buying toilet paper is the icing on the cake.
 
In all seriousness, the impact our nation is something we haven’t seen in a century, as far as a health crisis is concerned. The wide-ranging effects on business and the yet-to-be-seen health impact will likely make this the “make-or-break” moment of the Trump presidency. So far, the government has come out flat-footed in its response. With several weeks of lead time, little was done to prepare.
 
That’s water under the bridge. What is needed now is leadership. Clear, truthful information coming out of the government. If Mr. Trump can step up to the plate in such fashion, handle the crisis, let the experts lead and refrain from opportunism, it could well punch his ticket to a second term. Is he capable of doing that?
 
Meanwhile, life goes on, so far as campaign 2020 is concerned. Bernie’scampaign is on life-support after Joe Biden came out smiling at the end of “Not-so-Super” Tuesday, including a shellacking in Michigan, a state Bernie took in 2016. Bernie, however, reminded us he is not a Democrat, but rather an Independent using the Democratic apparatus, by not suspending his campaign and consolidating behind the presumptive nominee.
 
Instead, Joe will still get to “Feel the Bern” in a debate Sunday (not in front of a live studio audience). I’m guessing the President will be taking notes and Tweeting commentary. As we used to say on the playing field, there is no team in Bern.
 
How much easier it would be were this Russia, where Vlad basically was just assured power for life. Yes, folks, that’s right. Our “friend,” ex-KGB agent and anti-West authoritarian was granted two more terms by Russian parliament. That’s up for a nationwide vote, but I’m sure we all know how that will go. The opposition sees it as an internal coup. Regardless, the Russian constitution would be far more valuable here in the states — we need more TP.
 
Continuing on “UnAmerican” topics, the Wall Street Journal has a fascinating story about the resurgence of artificial turf on major league baseball. Turns out studies are showing it to be safer than trying to grow grass that dies in hot, dry climates. Now, artificial turf has come a long way from the plastic grass carpets we remember from the cookie-cutter multi-purpose stadiums we remember from our youth, but the purest in me died a little. Sorry, Crash Davis.
 
A lot of hard, disappointing news today, so let’s wrap up with something fun: Coronavirus? Phooey. That didn’t stop thousands in France from setting the world record for largest Smurf gathering.
 
I can’t add anything to that. Revel in its Smurfiness.
 
Thanks for reading. While you are here, why not Subscribe to my daily newsletter, bookmark what’s On My Radar or follow me on Facebook and Twiiter? And tell your friends