Outrage is in, with appeals to emotion and sharply drawn characters. While our new, wonderful range of media deliver so much content, some content creators would be better termed fodder creators.
Fodder creators are resolutely not interested in traditional journalism. Old-school reporting, in its best incarnation, delivers facts and gives enough context to explain what those facts mean.
No, fodder creators are not concerned with the who, what, when, where and how. Instead, they seek to promote outrage, by delivering details meant to look bad and turning the ordinary into something strange, even corrupt.
Take some content written by Leif Parsell in the press outlet of what is probably Maine’s most powerful conservative advocacy group. Before Mr. Parsell was fired for his writings on race and diversity crafted prior to his hiring, he wrote a story about the people who came to testify about the impact of DHHS cuts.
When the BDN covered the first day of those hearings, it included comments from patients, people with family members who received care, Portland Mayor Michael Brennan, prominent members of the clergy and DHHS Commissioner Mary Mayhew. The story noted that one person had signed up to testify in support of the cuts, and reported there was a rally in opposition organized by a coalition “representing the elderly, children, the poor, and churches.”
No matter one’s view of the proposed cuts, there is nothing more usual in our democracy than people turning out to express their views. Yet Parsell wrote, “[M]any of these organizations have a vested interest in ensuring continued state funding of the programs that provide the bulk of their operational budgets … Patient Advocacy Groups, whether serving the elderly, disabled, the poor, the unemployed, or a variety of other Maine groups, seem intent on participating in the public policy debate regarding funding for their organizations.”
Parsell reported that, in planning the visit to the Legislature, “a strategy for the transportation of social services recipients was even discussed.”
You see, in the Parsell story, there was something not-quite-right with groups serving the poor, whose budgets to provide services which were to be slashed, attending the hearings and using their First Amendment rights to petition government. People who work with the poor and needy, whose salaries would be higher if they did the very same work in for-profit organizations, were portrayed as selfish. Traditional political efforts were transmuted into something between the nefarious and an outrage.
Now the same press outlet has targeted MaineHousing. Rather than tying down the details from 800,000 invoices over 13 years, these became fodder. After receiving a lengthy document listing expenses, there was no pause to find out or explain who, what, when, how and why.
Rather than reporting why and how much the federally audited MaineHousing paid for hotels on the list, the story included descriptions written by the hotels to entice customers. A reader would not know that some grants require organizations receiving those grants to send people to meetings so they are up-to-date on what has worked well and what has not, nor that conferences attendees pay negotiated hotel rates far below the usual price.
Nor would one know that costs portrayed as foolish luxuries were part of wellness programs that held down health care costs. The outrage machine thrives on crowing that MaineHousing’s payroll soared; how boring it is to explain that additional employees had to be added in order efficiently use new federal funds.
Real policy differences are at stake when it comes to low-income housing projects. And, with information about each spending item incomplete, it is impossible to know that every single item was proper. However, the tale told bears less resemblance to old-school investigative reporting than to fodder creation.
Good journalism can be lively or dull, but its commitment to accuracy serves the public more than ginning up outrage based on broad sketches and overwrought prose. Whether it’s the work of the political organization discussed above or the CutlerFiles, fodder creation is strategic politics, not journalism. Recognizing the difference is critical, as is demanding that the fodder creators tell the full picture about what they tell, who they are and by whom they are funded.
Amy Fried is a professor of political science at the University of Maine. You can follow her on Twitter at twitter.com/ASFried and on her blog, pollways.com.
Even the BDN uses ‘Fodder’ in their headlines to garner more interest in stories. A lot of people just skim the headlines of stories and fail to read fully into them. For instance the recent story with the headline ‘Calais student suspended for Tebowing’. Upon reading the story it was not the act of Tebowing, but the fact he was on the floor at a period of time when the floor was supposed to be cleared.
Headlines are headlines, we should read the full article for the information.
The BDN is certainly guilty of doing just what Parsell did–although as an opinion writer for them, I suppose you can’t call out your paper. I find the lack of journalism is the BDN frustrating. There is way too much of reporting only what someone says, and not the context, or even the most basic fact finding to show if the person’s comment is accurate. The overall tone of the news articles (and certainly 90% of the editorials) is one of criticism of Republicans, not so much for Democrats.
As for MSHA—after what was just discovered at the MTA, is it any wonder people are suspicious of fancy hotel charges, massage services, theme park tickets? I really do not think that the head of a public agency should evidence outrage when asked by the people and/or their elected representatives to account for his or her spending. I certainly hope that the expenses at MSHA can be reasonably accounted for–but don’t you dare imply that the very people who pay for these expenses have no right to know who, what, where , when and why. So far, the MSHA has not released the how much and what for of these expenses.
People who work with the poor and needy, whose salaries would be higher if they did the very same work in for-profit organizations, were portrayed as selfish
The equivalent work, in most cases, does not exist in the private sector. It’s a “jobs program” for liberals, hiding behind the language of charity and altruism.
And you and your family are probably a recipient of numerous programs your self or will be someday. Mother Theresa was not the only saintly human that ever lived. Lots of good, caring people out here working providing necessary services to people just like you or less fortunate, working real cheap but not as cheap as your thoughts. FYI Hospitals and insurance companies are private NOT CHEAP no more fodder for u. I have to dig clams to pay for these services and am proud of some. The programs not to blame but the cheaters should have to dig clams like me.
I thought you and your cohort are always advocating public services be handled by the private sector. Please list those service organizations who are to take over these services (and how you intend to support them).
“Now the same press outlet has targeted MaineHousing. Rather than tying down the details from 800,000 invoices over 13 years, these became fodder. After receiving a lengthy document listing expenses, there was no pause to find out or explain who, what, when, how and why.”
Wow.
Maine Housing provided a list of vendors without providing the amounts paid to each vendor. Any accounting system, including one employing a quill pen and parchment, should have payment details readily available for each of these vendors. The fact that this information was withheld leads a reasonable person to suspect a coverup.
“Tying down the details” is the sole responsibility of Maine Housing and they’re stonewalling. It reeks.
Professor Fried has her academic robes all in a knot over what she calls “fodder journalism”. When I was a student the quotation of someone else’s writing (without attribution) was plagerism. Maybe the BDN reporter who extensively quoted (word for word) a Maine Democratic press release on the Governors State of the State speech can be excused because it was just a press release. Further more, in the recent past the BDN sent a reporter to “find out” what was going on at the Maine State Housing Authority who’s father is employed by MSHA. The BDN and its fellow ‘journalist” like to mock Fox News do to it motto of fair and balanced reporting, when it has the problem itself.