Hurting or helping democracy?
By Jerry Burris
Advertiser Editorial Editor
At a conference this weekend celebrating a remarkable 30-year run for the Honolulu Community-Media Council, participants heard from editor and writer James Fallows, author of the book "Breaking the News: How the Media Undermine American Democracy."
It is unfair to Fallows and the book to summarize it in a sentence or two. But essentially, he chronicles the sins and omissions of contemporary journalism, from celebrity-driven reporting to the tendency to over-simplify issues or reduce them to black-and-white conflict.
The result, Fallows argues, is growing mistrust of the news media and (by implication) a loss of faith in American democracy.
The fact that journalists like to hear such matters debated might come across as laughably self-absorbed: How many other lines of work spend time worrying whether their performance is helping or hurting American democracy?
But if there is a connection between the state of journalism and the health of democracy, it is one that the news media have been more than willing to promote. And if we claim that a free press, in the largest sense of the word, is important to democracy, then we must accept critics such as Fallows who argue poor performance can undermine that democracy.
How does this argument play out in tiny, isolated Hawai'i? Does our hot-house political culture create better journalism, or is democracy in the Islands as threatened by the news media as anywhere else?
The answer lies in the degree to which daily news reporting accurately reflects the political realities of daily life and the degree to which the news leaves people feeling empowered.
In the days leading up to, and following, statehood, there is no question that most critics would have found the media in Hawai'i supporting rather than undermining our brand of island democracy.
The papers were, for instance, huge backers of statehood and champions of the concept that Hawai'i's people had a right to govern themselves.
After statehood, the Legislature was busy building the nation's newest state government almost from scratch. The people were deeply involved and the media covered such events (including the elections that fueled them) with the utmost seriousness and sense of importance.
And if you want to talk about the media creating a broad sense of community, look no farther than the first live telecast in Hawai'i: The 1966 football game between Michigan State and Notre Dame. An entire state was galvanized by the electronic miracle.
Over the years, however, there has been a growing sense that the news media might be of less importance to the civic life, more distant.
Part of the explanation is that the great "public" issues of post-statehood Hawai'i — building a government and opening society — have largely been settled. Thus, politics and civic life today are focused on the less exciting business of maintenance and troubleshooting.
One response to this trend of disengagement has been the emergence of something called "civic" or "public journalism" which seeks to generate civic interest and debate. The movement is not without its critics (why should journalists be boosters of anything, even civic involvement?).
But it is a reminder that the news media and the public are partners in this experiment we call democracy, not separate players with separate agendas.
Jerry Burris can be reached through letters@honoluluadvertiser.com.
