How cable news killed American journalism

I remember being a journalism student in high school and college, thinking I would be part of this great tradition of the Walter Cronkites of the world.

I would speak truth to power, I thought, and I would always strive to be accurate, probing and diligent.

Some 15 years later, I'm not working in the journalism field, and I'm disillusioned with the field. I still love it, but I'm watching it die at the hands of a million murderers — ruthless corporate ownership and social media at the forefront.

But I'm also watching American journalism commit a suicide on the institution. In the past 20 years I've watched the transition from Cronkite to Hannity, and it's weighing heavy mind.

Journalism is (or should be) in the business of delivering facts. If the governor's mansion burned down, that needs to be covered. If someone is leading in an election, that's news. When a figure is assassinated, that story should be tackled.

The business of delivering facts seems simple enough, right? However, in 2011, American journalism has veered from this in an effort to out-do the competition. American journalism is no longer about "just the facts, ma'am"; it's about the he-said/she-said battles.

I blame cable news for this. Somewhere along the way, cable news got in the business of "analysis," where people were paid to tell you what they thought (and, therefore, what you should think) about the facts. A plane crashes. Instead of just reporting what is known, cable news needed to fill airwaves, so talking heads came on to offer their own theories on why, what would happen, who it would affect, etc. Today on any given cable news network, virtually the entire prime-time lineup is filled with people who talk at you, telling you what they think about the world, and often bringing in other people to discuss the very same topics.

Newspaper reporters, God love 'em, who have grown up in this culture have adopted a similar mindset. There's no longer just a fact-based approach. In 2011, every story must have a he-said/she-said angle.

This really resonated with me this past month when I was watching a report on Gov. Rick Perry's presidential bid, and a statement he made about the Texas economy. He cited some figures that were provably false. Perry lied at the debate, something that anyone could prove with little difficulty.

The coverage that evening consisted mostly of people from the left and right battling it out over whether Perry was right, or if he was taken out of context, or if he was misstating, or if he was committing the ultimate gaffe.

Folks, if the sky is blue, I don't need a panel of pundits to tell me that it's red, no it's blue, no it might be green, no its blue, sky color is a Communist plot. I need the news industry to just tell me — get this radical idea — the news.

A fact is a fact is a fact. It's either true or it's not. It's not helpful in any form to have people debate if the fact is a good idea or a bad idea. It simply is. Those discussions may have a point in shaping the next round of facts, but news outlets shouldn't be in the news-shaping business. Just tell me what happened and carry on.

I'm all for the marketplace of ideas. Social media has only made that more feasible, with anyone with an Internet connection able to post their thoughts. And I love it — it's what the First Amendment is all about. (Although, I say that with a firm reminder that everyone may be entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts.)

But I think it is incumbent on our media industry to get back to the gold standard of reporting — providing facts to the audience and letting the readers and viewers draw their own conclusions. Until then, it feels like a thousand paper cuts attacking the industry I love, and it hurts.