Landmarks Then and Now

When, in 1971, Daniel Ellsberg wanted to publicize the Report of the Office of the Secretary of Defense Vietnam Task Force, aka the Pentagon Papers, he took it to the New York Times that, after long discussions about potential legal liability, began publishing the 47-volume, 7,000-page cache of government documents and analysis.  Those documents and the paper’s decision to publish them remain a landmark in (a) the people’s right to know what our government is doing, even when that government doesn’t want us to, (b) our trust in the mainstream media and (c) the concomitant decline in our trust in government. 

To the public’s immeasurable benefit, the Pentagon Papers demonstrated the true reasons for U.S. involvement in the war in Viet Nam and that presidential administrations had lied repeatedly to the public and Congress about U.S. actions and motives.  By publishing highly controversial documents, the NYT told us the truth and enhanced our trust in it by doing so.

By contrast, when, in 2022, Elon Musk wanted to publicize the inner workings of the social media platform Twitter and its interactions with government, probably the last place he considered contacting was the New York Times.  Instead, he tapped independent journalists Matt Taibbi, Bari Weiss and Michael Shellenberger who mostly publish on Substack. 

That too is a landmark.  As before, it’s a bold reassertion of the people’s right to know information about what our government is up to, including things that government (in this case, the FBI and the Biden Administration) would prefer to remain secret. 

But this time the publication is also a landmark in the precipitous decline in our trust in the news media.  This time, the journalists were chosen specifically because they’re not part of the MSM.  They’ve all been there, found it wanting and moved on to pastures more nourishing to independence, honesty, balance and rationality.  Taibbi, Weiss and Shellenberger are many things, but mouthpieces for government or serfs of the MSM, they’re not.  

In short, the MSM has lost our trust and confidence that was once hugely bolstered by the publication of the Pentagon Papers.  Now, those with vital information to share go elsewhere to do so. 

It’s a landmark on our journey away from reliance on the MSM.  Outlets like the Times, CNN, MSNBC, etc. fully merit our distrust; they’ve spectacularly failed to perform their core function, their sine qua non – the provision of reliable information in at least a nominally disinterested way.  Americans got the message and now we’re moving on.  Our destination (how we eventually get our news) remains uncertain, but for now at least, independent journalists with track records of integrity are our best conduit.

Interestingly, and in parallel, Ellsberg’s first choice for publication wasn’t the Times but Congress; but a series of senators turned down the opportunity, although, once the Times began publication, one senator entered the whole trove in the Congressional Record.  Did Musk consider Congress as an outlet for the “Twitter Papers?”  I’m going to guess no.  After all, why would he reject one distrusted outlet only to choose another?  His reliance on Taibbi, et al signals the decline of trust in Congress as much as in the MSM.

It’s not as if news media giants didn’t know this might happen.  For a bit of historical context, consider this quotation from historian Will Durant’s book, The Age of Reason Begins, about Western Europe between, roughly, 1550 and 1650:

The Leiden weekly News and the Amsterdam Gazette were read throughout Western Europe because they were known to speak freely, while elsewhere the press was at this time governmentally controlled.  When a French king asked to have a Dutch publisher suppressed, he was astonished to learn that this was impossible.

Durant published his book in 1961, so he couldn’t have guessed at the ignorance or ironies of today.  Yes, 400 years ago, in the earliest days of systematic news delivery, people wanted to know the truth and chose Dutch newspapers for the sole reason that they provided same, free of governmental interference.  In 2020 (and before and after), Twitter happily served as the mouthpiece for government on issues such as the 2020 presidential election, the Hunter Biden laptop, COVID and our attempts to fight it, etc., and suppressed speech in the very way that long-ago French king wanted.  (Yes, there’s a telling comparison between the Biden Administration and that French autocrat who ruled by fiat and considered himself chosen by God.)  The difference of course is that then, suppression was “impossible,” whereas today it’s proved simplicity itself.

Adaptability is one of humankind’s greatest attributes; we owe our very existence to it.   Musk’s choice of three independents is a fine example.  The MSM has gone all-in for wokeness, for an ideological narrative at the expense of fact.  That means not only the suppression of speech and facts uncongenial to those narratives, but apparently an amazing inability to see the pitfalls of doing so – levels of circulation and the public’s respect in freefall.  Did they think we wouldn’t notice?  Did they think there was nothing we could do, that their audiences wouldn’t go elsewhere?

There was a time when surly editors at the Times and countless other papers would have brought down the wrath of God on reporters who allowed a scoop like the release of the Twitter Papers to go to a competitor.  No longer.  Today they’re content to pretend to themselves and their true believers that the Twitter archives are of no importance.  Fine.  But every time someone with important information to share spurns the MSM, its power and authority diminish along with its near-fatally-damaged good name.

This will continue.  Will the MSM see the light and return to responsible journalism?  Or will it continue to become ever more irrelevant to everyday Americans who every day reward those who respect us enough to tell us the factual truth?