Only 28% of Americans trust newspapers, television, and radio to report the news fully, accurately, and fairly, according to Gallup. That's the lowest reading in the poll's 50-year history.
Journalism schools, meanwhile, are disappearing.
The Ohio State University folded its standalone School of Journalism into the School of Communication in 1995. Ohio University's E.W. Scripps School of Journalism in Athens still operates, but now under the umbrella of the Scripps College of Communication.
What was once "journalism" is now simply "communications."
Take a recent example. Three Ohio outlets covered the same legislative push to ban DEI in K-12 public schools. NBC4 Columbus ran its story on June 2. The Ohio Capital Journal ran its piece on May 27. Spectrum News 1 ran its piece on May 26. Lined up against each other, the three pieces tell almost the same story in almost the same way with the exact same lean.
Frankly, this is a storytelling formula that elevates one side at the expense of the other. It is groupthink masquerading as journalism.
All three headlines and leads begin with opposition or focus on the ban. The three stories describe the bill as "vague" or frame it through critics' concerns, without flagging that those descriptions come from opponents.
Between them, the three articles quote roughly a dozen opponent voices, including the Ohio Federation of Teachers, the ACLU of Ohio, Equality Ohio, the Ohio School Counselor Association, and a Toledo Public Schools board member. They quote two proponents: bill sponsor Sen. Andrew Brenner, R-Delaware, and House Speaker Matt Huffman, R-Lima.
The opponent's quotes are substantive and emotional. One source in the Spectrum News piece calls the bills "a form of white supremacy." The Capital Journal cites a 2018 NBER study on Black teachers and a 2021 GLSEN survey on LGBTQ students. Both studies are real, both come from credible sources, and both support the opposition's argument. Yet, none of the three articles cites supporting research, a supporting parent, or an outside policy group with a different opinion.
None of the three pieces includes the context the reader deserves.
Ohio legislative hearings are routinely split into proponent rounds and opponent rounds. The 80-to-7 testimony imbalance reflects which round was being held that day, not overall public sentiment. That fact might change how a reader interprets the numbers. Yet, none of the outlets included it.
This isn't one reporter's choice or one outlet's bias. It's a pattern that undermines sound reporting and the delivery of fact-based information. When three pieces from three outlets show the same source imbalance, the same framing choices, and the same missing context, the reader is seeing how Ohio's media outlets have come to cover certain subjects. It also explains the lack of trust in the media.
Whatever a reader thinks about the bill, the coverage of it shouldn't be doing the persuading — that's what editorials are for. It's why we started The Pennant.
Questions, comments and letters to the editor are welcome. Email [email protected].