What's Wrong

I was going to write a long and thorough argument for why media matters generally, but I think an example from this morning’s New York Times will suffice for now.

Headline: “In Poorest States, Political Stigma Is Depressing Participation in Health Law”

Anti-Obamacare stigma is generated in many ways, but one formidable source is the deluge of political advertising that attempts to tar the healthcare law and anyone associated with it. And lest you think the anti-healthcare ads run by Americans for Prosperity are contributing to democratic debate, consider the record for accuracy that they have accumulated. (It’s not good.)

Here’s the heart of the Times story:

“Health professionals, state officials, social workers, insurance agents and others trying to make the law work for uninsured Americans say the partisan divisions and attack ads have depressed participation in some places. They say the law has been stigmatized for many who could benefit from it…”

And in a heartbreaking/maddening example, a social worker described how “people who did enroll paused in their excitement to ask, ‘Wait – this isn't that Obamacare, is it?’”

We cannot know definitively what impact the anti-Obamacare ads have on individual attitudes, but this story illustrates the role of media in our political system and where some big problems lie.

First, corporations and wealthy individuals – with only their economic self-interest in mind – can spend unlimited amounts of money to impact political opinions (including, hideously, an individual’s decision not to pursue healthcare). These ads can be misleading or include blatant falsehoods – and since they’re aired with near-anonymity, accountability is limited.

Second, because such misinformation exists, we must depend on other media messages to counter it, but unfortunately, we can’t always depend on other media messages to do that.

For one thing, paid advertising cannot be countered by paid advertising when resources are unequal. The Times article notes that during the enrollment period in West Virginia, a network of healthcare providers aired ads encouraging signups, but these ads were outnumbered 12 to 1 by anti-healthcare ads from conservative groups.

Journalism should step in here to correct misinformation, which mainstream media institutions will do, to the extent they can while avoiding charges of bias. (For calling lies lies.) Even when that happens, though, journalists must reach a receptive audience.

How do we know this system isn't working? When, from the Times again, “literally, people thought there would be chips embedded in their bodies if they signed up for Obamacare.”