The Discord Leaks Show the Degradation of Journalism
The mainstream media's response and coverage of the latest Discord leaks show the degradation of actual journalism in the U.S.
It’s quite known that the basis for a strong and efficient democracy is that of the free and independent press. We often tout the United States as having the strongest democracy in the world, emphasizing our 1st Amendment right of freedom of the press and speech. While the history of journalism in America wasn’t always perfect (yellow journalism in the 1890s for example), the later half of the 20th century saw a consistent idea of what journalism is and how it’s best practiced. And yet journalism today is far removed from where it stood during the days of the Pentagon Papers and Watergate. As we all know now, the recent leaks that originated on Discord has dominated the airwaves and internet. The Washington Post received hundreds of classified documents, which many of them now having been spread to various other media companies, both corporate and independent. I’m not here to discuss the information that is already known and has been reported on — I’m here to discuss the total lack of journalistic integrity, prowess, ethics, and overall failures of the way the mainstream media has currently handled this latest leak.
The media companies and their journalists have decided not to focus on the actual leaks to properly inform the American public, instead they have almost squarely focused on finding out who the leaker is, why they did it, where they work, and how this could of happened. And that is exactly what has transpired over the last few days. The Washington Post and New York Times led teams of journalist to investigate and attempt to discover the whistleblower, having published his name and who he was before even the FBI gave a statement that they found him. In all sense of the matter, it appears two of the largest news agencies in the U.S. assisted law enforcement in finding the leaker. In what day and age does this happen? Limited coverage has been seen in actually going through these documents and informing the public, which one would hope is one of the roles of the press. When a journalist receives leaked information, they attempt to verify its authenticity and then inform the public. They do not then attempt to find out who the leaker was, at least that hasn’t been a precedent throughout journalistic history. And yet, the Washington Post and New York Times decided to commit resources and money to discover who this person was.
Attempting to discover exactly what the leaked classified documents contained is difficult, as very few news agencies have done actual reporting on them. If one searches through the endless Google pages, occasionally an article may be found that describes one of the leaks. For example, one such document showed the presence of U.S. troops actually inside Ukraine. While this was denied for months now, the Pentagon has come out and verified that it is true. And yet this has only been vaguely reported on by the mainstream press. Would the U.S. public have known this otherwise? No. The very idea and concept of the free press is for journalists to obtain otherwise unknown information (through leaks, private investigations, sources, on the ground reporting, etc.) and then present it to the U.S. public. Their job is not to hunt down leakers, nor is it to pander towards D.C. elites and the intelligence community. The total lack of care for the leaks and the focusing on the leaker himself should show us that the mainstream media do not actually engage in real and authentic journalism, nor is it their prerogative. Elon Musk recently labeled NPR as “State Affiliated Media” on Twitter, only to rephrase it to “Government-funded Media” which led to NPR and PBS to quit the social media platform. I mention this as it would be just as appropriate to label The Washington Post, the New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, FOX, and others as Corporate-funded Media as that helps explain the lack of real journalism partaking in these companies.
With the suspect now in custody, “journalists” are now in full force in trying to understand how the D.O.D. could ever let something like this happen (the memories of Snowden seem to be lost). As presented by and put together by Breaking Points, reporters repeatedly asked the D.O.D. spokesperson at the Pentagon on Thursday on how this could of happened, what steps they’re taking to ensure less people have access to classified documents, etc. Not a single question regarding any of the materials actually in the leak, the lies the U.S. has told its people and allies, only the apparent concern that the D.O.D. isn’t secretive nor secure enough with its classified information. Now I am not implying that it isn’t concerning that classified documents were casually being shared in a Discord channel for months, I don’t see anyone arguing for that. But what I am arguing for is the responsibility and job of journalists when it comes to reporting on leaked information. They are not supposed to lead investigations into who the leaker is, especially not assisting law enforcement in finding that source. They take the information that they have and report on it to the public — the idea isn’t very complicated and yet the present situation shows the mainstream media is completely unable (or unwilling) to do so.
It is no secret that the mainstream media has been struggling over the past decade, only emphasized with their obsession of the Trump-effect since 2015. Ratings have been plummeting as more and more Americans tune out from the 24 hour news cycle. While public opinion and trust in the mainstream media has been declining, it has opened up the possibility for truly independent journalism to get a foot in the door. The Intercept, Breaking Points, The Free Press, The Federalist, and various other independent news agencies are doing the job that the mainstream media isn’t. The handling of the Discord leaks has shown a drastic divide between these two outlets and it presents the possibility that real journalism is still possible in the U.S. While the mainstream media still dominates the headlines on TV and the internet (thank you corporate sponsors), the fight by these independent sources is a bright spot in an otherwise dark time for news. While the degradation of journalism is all too prevalent and accelerating, there is always the possibility that something better comes out of the ashes.
It's all too familiar of what happened with Snowden, as you mentioned. I feel as though there was more of a concentration on a person actually leaking information, rather than the fact that the American Gov. is actively spying on its citizens. I remember hearing Snowden's name first, before I actually heard what he leaked.
I think this isn't the same case, as the recent leaker wasn't doing this for moral reasons, like Snowden arguably was, but it is the same outcome it seems.