Up-to-the-Minute News Can Be Our Most Important Weapon

Actually, most of us did not really experience it; only the residents of the affected towns and cities did. But if you were as riveted to the news as I was on that day, you felt as though perhaps you knew what it was like to live in some war-torn Middle Eastern country for a day.

But one thing you could be certain of: You knew every important bit of information released about the suspect, and about how to handle yourself until he was caught.

All this was only possible thanks to the availability of round-the-clock news coverage — which was particularly important due to the fluid and dangerous nature of the situation, one that could not wait for a 6:30 national news broadcast, or even a thrice-hourly news update on a local station; in circumstances such as these, one could only be sure one was as safe and knowledgeable as possible if one was receiving all available information, instantly.

The constant flow of information delivered by the media is driven by the same incentives that drive all other businesses: the quest for success, which means ratings, money and the desire to break the news first. This competition among outlets to “scoop” the others leads to the same result as do all other competitive markets in a capitalist society: the best possible product for the consumer.

Needless to say, in the desire to deliver instant news, media outlets must vigilantly ensure that they are disseminating accurate information; providing false information can often be more harmful than providing the correct information a few minutes later. No one would argue that the media does not have an obligation to conduct rigorous fact-checking. And when they do not live up to this obligation, they should suffer the same consequences as someone who provides a bad product.

True, imperfect fact-checking might be less of a reality were it not for the desire to break up-to-the-minute news first. But that is hardly a reason to criticize the up-to-the-minute news cycle per se. Would we be better off if we were only given twice-daily updates? There are some irresponsible people, and always will be; but let’s not blame automobiles for drunk drivers.

Also, while it is certainly true that in the days after the bombing, significant false information speculating about the identity of the bombers was released, particularly over the internet, much of that information was released not by respected media outlets, but by individuals trying to play detective. This is to be expected, since these individuals do not have any reputation to protect.

That is why most people turn to news outlets they respect, particularly during a crisis, when accurate information is most essential. On Friday morning, I was glued to news outlets I respect, rather than some back-bencher blog or rabble-rousing talk show.

And by and large, the major news outlets behaved honorably and responsibly in reporting the news.

I am certainly no cheerleader for the mass media; I avoid it as much as possible, and have little use for much of what they do, including their general sensationalism, tabloid-like reporting, political biases in purported “news” stories, and many other yellow-journalism misdeeds. It would be accurate to say that I generally despise the media.

However, none of those problems are specific to the round-the-clock news cycle. Indeed, “yellow journalism” was a term coined long before round-the-clock news was in existence. (And on that note, it should be pointed out that the success of yellow-journalism outlets reflects most poorly on the people who actually read that stuff; after all, who’s the greater fool, the one who sells rotten food or the one who buys it?)

When there is a specific crisis that requires dissemination of instant information, and when news outlets are indeed disseminating that information, they can be an essential tool. In times like these, there can be no such thing as too much information.

This article appeared in print on page D7 of the April 24th, 2013 edition of Hamodia.