The Erosion of Objective Journalism: Impacts and Solutions

The news media landscape has undergone an alarming transformation in recent years away from neutral, fact-based journalism towards ideologically driven partisanship and even propaganda.

This phenomenon confounds me both as a human who values truth and as a financial advisor relying on accurate data to guide clients.

In my view, this transition has been driven by a perfect storm of increased political polarization, the bifurcation of media echo chambers, and the prioritization of opinion-based content to generate profits over informing the public.

Concrete examples of this biased coverage abound across the political spectrum.

Stories exaggerate or omit key details to align with a target demographic’s preconceived narrative. For instance, an investigation into a favored political candidate may be completely ignored or denounced as a witch hunt, while similar concerns about an opponent are amplified extensively.

Reports on proposed healthcare policies focus on slogans over substantive impacts. Even something as vital as COVID public health measures were presented through a partisan lens.

In contrast, some new forms of non-traditional media have tried countering this propaganda model by inviting diverse perspectives and questioning dominant narratives.

Independent podcasts like Making Sense with Sam Harris feature in-depth, nuanced conversations spanning the ideological spectrum. YouTube channels like Krystal, Kyle & Friends analyze spin from both establishment-left and populist-right pundits.

I love Lex Fridman who even went as far as telling his advertisers that he will mention their existence at the start and end of the podcast and post their links in the show notes but keep his episodes free from interruptions.

I also appreciate that the format allows us to actually dive deeper and discuss in detail the topics related to the guests and the business they represent. The only other show, but far less sincere is The Joe Rogan Experience.

Though imperfect, these alternative outlets expand the marketplace of ideas beyond traditional gatekeepers.

However, the noble pursuit of ideological neutrality is frequently complicated by the immense influence of entrenched institutional power and money interests.

Due to financial reliance on advertising and corporate partnerships, even independent outlets are pressured to minimize damage to brands, the military, surveillance agencies, and other established authorities, rather than prioritizing accountability. The agendas of shareholders, lobbyists, and officials often supersede transparency.

This nationalist drumbeat is particularly insidious when assessing global markets, as media coverage exaggerates domestic investment opportunities while dismissing overseas options as too unstable or risky along purely nationalistic lines, rather than sound financial analysis.

This is particularly obvious in the deepening chasm between China and the United States.

In the past politicians were careful to call a country an enemy or a leader of a country a dictator, but in the US we can see this wording on a daily basis, starting with President Biden and echoed by all political figures in both parties.

As a financial mentor, this environment is untenable.

Those seeking financial freedom require facts to construct budgets, purchase rationally, and invest wisely over decades. Yet in a media ecosystem filled with partisan propaganda, reality is obscured by manipulated optics from all sides.

Empirical research confirms the concrete impacts — consumers purchasing flawed products, investors making poor decisions, and corporations pursuing unethical practices, all based on biased misinformation and spin rather than truth.

One study by the non-partisan FACTS initiative found over $100 billion in likely investment losses over six years attributable to propaganda influencing unwise choices.

Looking forward, the continued corrosion of public trust in media and politics threatens ill-informed decisions from consumers, investors, and businesses that could cumulatively slow economic progress.

Eventual wholesale skepticism and loss of shared civic reality may undermine markets altogether.

Rehabilitating confidence in journalism’s fundamental commitment to truth-telling is paramount.

This will require reforms like increased public funding for non-profit media, stronger firewalls between editorial and advertising, a renewed emphasis on ethics in journalism education and training, and more.

The integrity of our free market system depends on empowering individuals and institutions to make choices grounded in facts rather than partisanship.

In my opinion, these changes will be all the more important during the transition we are experiencing and observing on the geopolitical scale these days.

We might find a constant talk that will exponentially increase in the next 12-month election campaign year about US exceptionalism nice to listen to. We might like to hear and believe that everybody waging a war against a “friend of the West” is a lunatic, prone to lose, and getting crippled forever.

The reality looks very different. To learn about the reality we have to currently depend on people on the ground who are not beholden to any of the media or special-interest groups described above.

If we make the effort, we will learn that the Chinese people support and agree with their government at a rate of 70% + while in the US the current president has about 35% approval.

If we make an effort, we will learn that the Russian economy is not nearly as devastated as we are told and that the Russian money, its export of oil and gas, and it’s ability to find customers for its products and raw materials are back to pre-war levels in spite of all the sanctions of the West.

I believe they will never do business with us again and expand what has evolved during the war.

If we make an effort, we can learn from people on the ground that out of about 190 countries on the globe, more than 100 have not declared a side either way, Russia or US (West). 100 countries remain neutral and don’t want to be pulled into the way or forced to decide.

We are telling them that they are either for our views of isolation of Russia or they are against us, which makes them our enemy. Guess who they prefer to work with in the future. I suggest all other countries not directly involved in the war, including India and China.

If we make an effort we could learn that the development of a multi-polar world is real and BRICS+ will play a big role. After the BRICS summit in South Africa in August 2023 the BRICS alliance now has 11 official members with another 20 countries knocking on its door requesting entrance.

Those 11 countries have 46% of the world’s population, 30% of the world’s GDP, 43% of the world’s oil production, and 25% of the world’s export market. Guess what happens when more of the applicant countries are admitted.

I don’t even consider how these BRICS member countries interact with the West. Just consider their decision that they form their own economic, financial, and free-trade group. More importantly, as we become more and more nationalistic and protectionist, supported by the talk of our politicians and repeated like propaganda by the prevalent media, what happens when they decide not to want to deal and trade with us anymore? What if they grow large enough in numbers, and economic development to build their own encapsulated group?

If we make an effort, we can learn that these are not far-flung theories but a developing reality that we are not informed about. All we hear is that people not aligned with the West are dumb, not trustworthy, and our enemies.

We all must demand a change before it is too late. We cannot remain passive consumers of partisan propaganda and expect to retain a functioning democracy, equitable economy, or sane society.

The time has come to take action and speak out to defend quality journalism focused on truths rather than factions. Facts must prevail over agendas if we are to navigate the challenges ahead.

I know that it is polarizing to say this, but I only see the X-platform and Elon Musk pushing in that direction right now. He can afford it and I hope he will keep trying to keep free speech and community notes alive.

If that fails, we will possibly sink into a version of life that combines the scenarios of “The Brave NewWorld”, and “1984”.