Zur Rolle der U.S.-Medien bei der Wahl 2012 ....

" .. But that’s the Repu­bli­cans’ plight. The coun­try has a larger
pro­blem — “intellec­tu­al nihi­lism,” as the wri­ter Noam Schei­ber recently
labe­led it. Sin­ce 911, often but not always under the right’s aegis, truth
has been desta­bi­li­zed in Ame­ri­ca. The Bush administration’s con­tempt for
what it dis­missed as the “rea­li­ty-based com­mu­ni­ty” was vin­di­ca­ted when it
suc­cessful­ly gin­ned up a war by con­vin­cing Ame­ri­cans that the 911 hijackers
were Iraqis and that Sad­dam Hus­sein had wea­pons of mass des­truc­tion. Our
sus­cep­ti­bi­li­ty to ela­bo­ra­te, beau­tiful­ly wrought myths remains
int­act — whe­ther we’re being spun by poli­ti­ci­ans, cap­ta­ins of finan­ce pumping
up a bubble, or sports heroes like Lan­ce Arm­strong and Joe Pater­no. The news
busi­ness, which we once coun­ted on to vet hoaxes and fic­tions, is now so
inse­cu­re about its exi­sten­ti­al future that it was cowed to some ext­ent by
the Scar­bo­roughs, Noon­ans, and Roves, with most of the net­works, not just
Fox, igno­ring the sta­tis­ti­cal data of Sil­ver and others and instead
pre­dic­ting a long, nail-biting Elec­tion Night. (In rea­li­ty, the elec­tion was
cal­led for Oba­ma at 11:12 p.m. EST on NBC, just twel­ve minu­tes after it had
been in 2008.) Our remai­ning jour­na­li­stic insti­tu­ti­ons have even out­sour­ced what used to be the very core of their craft, fact-checking, to sur­ro­ga­tes* rele­ga­ted to gim­micky side­bars (awar­ding Pinoc­chi­os and “pants on fire”). The fact-checkers have pre­dic­ta­b­ly beco­me par­ti­san tar­gets, only fur­ther desta­bi­li­zing the who­le noti­on of what is meant by “news.”

[Zitat Ende]

( .. den kom­plet­ten Text lesen)

* Der her­vor­ge­ho­be­ne Text trifft - nach mei­ner Über­zeu­gung - auch hier bei uns zu. Die Medi­en wer­den ihrer Rol­le als Kon­troll­in­stanz nicht mehr gerecht, hier wie dort. Und kei­ne Alter­na­ti­ve in Sicht.