"A coalition of sentiments is not for the interest of printers. They, like the clergy, live by the zeal they can kindle and the schisms they can create. It is contest of opinion in politics as well as religion which makes us take great interest in them and bestow our money liberally on those who furnish aliment to our appetite... So the printers can never leave us in a state of perfect rest and union of opinion. They would be no longer useful and would have to go to the plough." --Thomas Jefferson to Elbridge Gerry, 1801. ME 10:254

Journalists tend to oversimplify things.

Reasons to agree:

There is no reason to summarize the president's speech, when you can read the whole thing online. Any summary will be inaccurate.
Involving themselves with a summary is an exercise in over-simplification and self-importance. They don't need to be involved in simplifying. They should just link to the speech. Now, if they need to provide fact checks or comments, it should be done in context of the words of the speech, not as an alternative. Their summary is an attempt to say that their words are more important than the presidents, and that they should be listened to not the president.
There is no reason to summarize the president's speech when the full text is readily available online. Summarization inherently risks accuracy, potentially distorting the original message. Journalists should focus on adding value through fact-checking or contextual commentary, presented alongside the speech's verbatim content. This approach maintains the integrity of the original message while offering critical insights. Summarizing, instead of directly linking to the speech, implicitly suggests that the journalist's interpretation holds more weight than the original words spoken by the president. This could inadvertently elevate the journalist's perspective above the source material, steering public understanding in a specific direction rather than encouraging direct engagement with the primary source.

Reasons to disagree:

Media plays a vital role in informing the public and facilitating democratic debate
Diversity of views in media reflects genuine differences in society, not manufactured discord
Critiquing those in power and exposing wrongdoing is a necessary function of a free press

Step 2: Identify Common Ground

Both sides value an informed citizenry and a well-functioning democracy
There is shared concern about the negative impacts of excessive sensationalism.
All stakeholders desire a media ecosystem that enriches public discourse.

Step 3: Address Underlying Issues & Assumptions

Issues:

Advertising-driven business models incentivize clickbait and inflammatory content.

Why do media outlets produce content that confirms biases and demonizes the other side?

Because that's what gets the most engagement and generates the most revenue.
Why does biased and demonizing content get the most engagement?

Because it resonates with people's existing beliefs and provides a sense of validation and righteousness.
Why are people drawn to content that validates their beliefs and makes them feel righteous?

Because in a complex and uncertain world, it provides a comforting sense of clarity and moral certainty.
Why do people crave a sense of clarity and moral certainty?

Because they are emotionally exhausted from the stresses and challenges of daily life, and seeking emotional relief and reassurance.
Why are people emotionally exhausted and seeking relief in news and commentary?

Because of a combination of factors, including:

The increasing pace, pressure, and precarity of work and economic life
The breakdown of traditional sources of community, identity, and meaning
The 24/7 barrage of negative and fearful stimuli from the attention economy
The unresolved traumas and inequities of our social and political arrangements

Algorithms and filter bubbles can amplify polarization and extremism.
Public appetite for simplistic, emotionally charged narratives over nuance and complexity.
There is a need to attract eyeballs and engagement to generate ad revenue, which can incentivize sensationalism, clickbait, and outrage bait.
Algorithms that promote content that provokes strong emotional reactions, often anger and fear, over more nuanced and balanced reporting.
The 24/7 news cycle and constant competition for scoops can prioritize speed over depth and accuracy.
The segmentation of audiences into ideological silos, which rewards content that confirms biases and demonizes the other side.
The decline of traditional funding models for journalism has led to cost-cutting, understaffing, and increased reliance on opinion and commentary over original reporting.

Assumptions:

Assuming media always acts with ill intent rather than balancing competing pressures.
Underestimating the public's ability to think critically and seek out quality journalism.
Painting with a broad brush and ignoring the diversity within media.

Objective Criteria for Assessing the Strength of this Belief

Quality of Journalistic Content: Evaluation of journalistic work for depth, accuracy, and complexity across various media platforms.
Public Perception and Trust: Surveys and studies measuring public trust in media and perceptions of content depth.
Comparison with Original Sources: Analysis of media summaries or reports against original speeches, documents, or research to identify discrepancies or simplifications.

Unstated Assumptions

That deeper, more complex reporting would be equally or more engaging to the audience.
That journalists have the necessary access and resources to provide in-depth coverage but choose not to.

Shared and Opposing Interests

Shared: Both critics and defenders of modern journalism likely value an informed public and a robust democratic society.
Opposing: Media organizations might prioritize engagement and profitability, which can sometimes conflict with the goal of providing complex and nuanced reporting.

Underlying Issues

Economic Pressures on Media: The shift towards digital media has intensified the competition for clicks and views, potentially favoring sensational or simplified content.
Audience Engagement: Changing consumption patterns may lead media to cater to perceived audience preferences for shorter, more digestible content.
Educational Gaps: A lack of media literacy can contribute to a public that is less able to engage with or demand in-depth analysis.

Key Resources

"The Elements of Journalism" by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel for foundational principles of journalism.
"Amusing Ourselves to Death" by Neil Postman for insights on how media shapes public discourse.
Studies from the Pew Research Center on public trust in media and content analysis.

Top-rated Solutions

Enhancing Media Literacy: Educating the public to critically evaluate news sources and demand substantive reporting.
Supporting Investigative Journalism: Encouraging models that fund and prioritize in-depth journalism, such as non-profit news organizations or subscription-based models.
Innovative Content Presentation: Developing engaging formats that make complex information accessible and interesting to wider audiences.
Policies to provide greater economic security and opportunity
Investing in mental health services and emotional resilience education
Rebuilding the institutions of community and civic life
Healing the traumas of historical and ongoing injustices
Cultivating practices of empathy, dialogue, and conflict resolution

Alternative Ways of Saying the Same Thing

"Media coverage often lacks complexity."
"News reporting simplifies complex issues."
"News is what somebody somewhere wants to suppress; all the rest is advertising." – Lord Northcliffe, British publisher
Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed; everything else is public relations." – George Orwell
"The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers." – Thomas Jefferson
Each alternative statement will be evaluated for its equivalency to the original belief, overall contribution to the discussion (% strength), and specificity to the topic at hand.

Best Pro and Con Content

Pro Reasons to Agree:

Inherent Constraints: Traditional and online media formats inherently limit the depth of coverage possible within a single piece.
Market Dynamics: There's a market-driven preference for content that is quick to consume, which can discourage in-depth reporting.

Con Reasons to Disagree:

Diverse Media Landscape: The vastness of the media landscape means there are numerous outlets that do offer in-depth analysis, although they may not be as widely consumed.
Consumer Responsibility: Audiences have a role in seeking out and supporting quality journalism; the media provides what is consumed.

Assessing Costs and Benefits

Costs:

Intellectual Diminishment: Simplified news might contribute to a less informed public, with potential negative consequences for democratic engagement and decision-making.
Erosion of Trust: Oversimplification can lead to misinformation, eroding public trust in media institutions.

Benefits:

Accessibility: Simplification can make information more accessible to a broader audience, potentially increasing overall engagement with current events.

Each of these aspects will be scored based on their impact on understanding, engagement, and the quality of public discourse, applying Maslow's hierarchy of needs where appropriate to categorize the type of impact (e.g., safety, belonging, esteem).

Supporting Media and Most Credible Supporters

Supporting Media: Including in-depth articles, documentaries, and podcasts that exemplify complex reporting and analysis.
Most Credible Supporters: Renowned journalists, media critics, and academic researchers who advocate for nuanced and thorough journalism.

Journalist tend to over simplify things