Summary
Title: Democracy and the News
Author: Herbert J. Gans
Publisher: Oxford University Press
ISBN: 0195151321
Pro:
• Provides readers with a different perspective on problems facing journalism
• Asks readers to rethink common assumptions regarding democracy and journalism
Con:
• Arguments aren’t supported by detailed notes and evidence
Description:
• Analysis of ideals of both democracy and journalism
• Explores how and why those ideals have failed
• Offers suggestions on how to improve democracy and journalism
Book Review
This is the motivating question behind Democracy and the News, by Herbert J. Gans. The Robert S. Lynd Professor of Sociology at Columbia University, Gans begins his analysis with a careful explanation of just what those ideals are and how they have operated in American history. This is important because Gans spends much of the rest of his book arguing that those ideals are more myth than reality. By focusing on these ideals, according to Gans, we actually prevent ourselves from improving a genuinely problematic situation.
Journalists themselves are perhaps among the most important supporters of the myths Gans wants us to re-examine. Idealistic journalists see their role in a democratic society as consisting of four parts:
- “(1) The journalist’s role is to inform citizens; (2) citizens are assumed to be informed if they regularly attend to the local, national, and international news journalists supply them; (3) the more informed citizens are, the more likely they are to participate politically, especially in the democratic debate that journalists consider central to participation and democracy; (4) the more that informed citizens participate, the more democratic America is likely to be.”
None of this, however, is entirely true. Informed people don’t necessarily participate any more than uninformed people. More significant, perhaps, is #2: the assumption that “journalists know best” when it comes to what information people really need in order to be well informed. If that were true, why are people paying less and less attention to so much of the news?
As Gans points out, the organizations that own and run news media outlets may spend a lot of time and money in order to create a customer profile for advertising purposes, but little or no time and money figuring out just what kinds of news the customers want to know about. This, among other things, helps create a sense of alienation among people — both from the news media itself and from the power structures reported upon. As he explains, “Journalists cannot function as messengers unless the recipients want and need them.”
Indeed, the fact that so much of the news media relies heavily upon favors from those in power only serves to make things worse. News becomes little more than political propaganda when reporters rely mostly or solely upon politicians and the powerful for their information. The public recognizes this, even if only dimly at times, and so the already-inflated role journalists suppose for themselves becomes increasingly irrelevant for most citizens.
If this sounds like a pessimistic view, it is — but Gans is not a pessimist. Perhaps surprisingly, Gans is very much an idealist and has always harbored strong sympathies for journalists and their place in society. What mutes the expected pessimism from Gans is the fact that he has very high hopes that American journalism can be reformed into something which is relevant to how people live and which does a better job at reporting real news, not the news spoon fed to them by the government.
