MUSKRAT FALLS: REPORTERS HAVE TO DO BETTER

The announcement by Ed Martin, interjected on day two of a “Show N’ Tell” on the Muskrat Falls construction site, is another in a long series of re-runs in which public information is treated as a game, and reporters as dolts.

The $600 million overrun didn’t even warrant the Premier’s presence, confirming who is in charge. The best Davis could muster, later, is a comment that he still “believes” in the project; as if dumb “belief” cancels the worst effects of a “sinkhole”.

The Nalcor CEO Ed Martin is a seriously failed senior bureaucrat; yet, he has unfettered authority to deal with the public, and to persist with ‘spin’ as the basis of cost overruns.

The surprising part is that he hasn’t been fired; but, that is only because democracy will suffer even lesser men who can’t show him the door.

WHO WILL GUARD THE GUARDIANS?

This entry is a companion piece to last week's Post.  First published in The Telegram July 28, 2012, it is re-printed here for UNCLE GNARLEY readers and for continuity.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? – Who Will Guard the Guardians, is a Latin phrase traditionally attributed to the Roman poet, Juvenal, and arguably associated with the philosophy of Plato, who suggested that those entrusted to be guardians of the state can be relied upon to guard themselves.  Though asked in a different context and a different time, the question is still fundamentally relevant.  Today, it is an appropriate query for modern media as the perceived ‘gatekeepers’ of our democracy.

We might first acknowledge that modern journalism is undergoing seismic changes. Nevertheless, the constraints which these changes suggest do not alter the fundamental fact that information is still the basis of a healthy democracy.

The behaviour of media and their styles of reporting, mirror changes, not just in technology, but in society, generally.  An emphasis on ‘infotainment’ is not just a daily preoccupation of editors, it is a mantra: keep it short, simple and interesting or risk losing audience. 

The younger demographic, in particular, rely on social media and internet sites to get news.   But social media is rarely about hard news.  Browsers like Yahoo and Google gather stories with a virtual insistence on brevity, which means little time can be afforded big ideas or public policy issues. Be that as it may, I submit, a society that values its rights and responsibilities is unable to afford such laxity.

What about local media? One is forced to ask, should news always be limited to pedestrian issues - all the time? News shows, that, for example, fill their time slot with a daily parade of misadventures, criminals and even innocents flowing through the court system, are frequently more about titillation than warnings of societal breakdown.  The courts have their place in the news; but, I suggest, society would not endure irreparable harm if we were spared some of Johnny’s missteps with the law; especially if a major public policy issue screams to be explained.