Reforming journalism?

Suppose there were a standard of journalistic ethics for covering politics? One that held up the responsibility of the Fourth Estate to inform the electorate? What would that look like?

Here’s a couple of possible resolutions to start with:

1. I will not repeat a falsehood or distortion without comparing it against available facts.
2. I will not attempt to estimate the outcome of an election before the last poll has closed.

Election results: American people lose

No matter who winds up getting inaugurated in January— despite Kerry’s concession, surprises may yet occur with full vote counts or the Electoral College— this election has demonstrated the effectiveness of deceiving the American people and stifling dissent. If the American people had turned en masse against the misinformation from the Bush Administration and the filtering of the audiences of his rallies, that might have put an end to that tactic. Sadly, such un-American behavior seems to get a pass from too many American people.

It would be nice if Kerry had stuck to the moral high ground and done nothing for folks like factcheckorg and spinsanity to complain of, but that wasn’t the case for this election. So while the strategy of running truth against lies and deception has yet to be tested, it’s clear that when both sides stoop to deceit, the better liar wins.

So expect more of the same in upcoming years. Check your facts and don’t let anyone get away with repeating lies in your presence.

An Open Letter

From: Max Rible Kaehn
To: Democracy for America, MoveOn.org, True Majority, Progressive Majority

There isn’t enough competition in our political system right now. Americans need the opportunity to choose candidates with fresh views without risking being marginalized. I think the Center for Voting and Democracy have a solution: Instant Runoff Voting. The two main parties will feel threatened by IRV; we’re going to need grassroots organizing to push it through. Will this be on your agenda for 2005? If so, how can I help?