Politics Isn’t the Only News

Imagine an alien coming down to Earth for some “anthropological” study. The larger universities have 40-50 departments, each specializing in a different subject or field of life. One is Political Science; perhaps another is International Relations; all the others are far from that. The alien then opens the Bureau of Labor Statistics annual reports and discovers year after year that approximately 5% of the work force is employed in government at all levels.

After a hard day’s work, the alien sits down to scan several newspapers. “Very strange,” it muses out loud. “All these news media seem to be spending around half their time and energy on only one field: politics. I wonder why – after all, far fewer humans work in politics and even fewer study the subject.”

Indeed! Open any newspaper (not counting the National Enquirer and its ilk) and that’s what you will find: politics, politics, education, politics, economics, politics, science, politics, politics, sports, technology, politics… The Times of Israel is no different in this regard, especially in today’s Israel with an ongoing war, interminable hostage negotiations, the prime minister on trial, dysfunctional government, etc.

Still, even in “normal times” this is the rule. But why? One obvious reason is that other than war – itself a continuation of politics by other means, as Clausewitz opined – there is no other area of life with as much “Action & Drama” as the political world that is based on, and suffused with, conflict. People are evolutionarily primed to “notice” conflict as opposed to other forms of human interaction. In short, the news media are simply “playing to the crowd.”

Second, the influence of politics on our lives: taxes, health policy, environmental regulation, macro-economic policy, etc. etc. – all obviously have a significant impact on our world. Moreover, in a democracy the elected leaders are doing what we (supposedly) (s)elected them to do for us. Political news is not just what “they are doing to/for us” but also – or rather – whether they are doing what we agreed that they would do. In short, it is a public mirror of our (un)met desires.

And yet…

When one looks at what truly affects us, it turns out that a huge amount of influential goings-on are outside the political sphere. For example, countless scientific and technological advances reported each day in professional journals and other non-“news” venues will change our lives down the road: pharmaceuticals & health (new vaccines, drugs, and bio-tech); transportation (drones, flying cars, autonomous vehicles); economics (cyber-currency, cybercrime, online banking, telework); environment (rising sea levels, catastrophic weather, global warming, bio-extinction); and so on. Of course, these are covered by the news, but with a frequency nowhere near the impact that they (will) have on our lives. So what’s the problem?

First – as Tevye the Milkman once put it: “tradition”. Newspapers commenced about 400 years ago; the profession of journalism started about 200 years ago. Back then, “politics” was just about all that was happening! Modern science was barely getting started; there were almost no macro-economics to talk about (or understand, until Adam Smith’s 1776 Wealth of Nations); the lives of common folk interested no one (most couldn’t even afford to buy a newspaper); not even team sports existed to fill news space!

In that news black hole, politics – war, diplomacy, rulers’ machinations – was all there was to report on. This “tradition” then self-reproduced itself even when more non-politics did emerge in the 1900s and continues to this day.

One can add to the “tradition” of political journalism the fact that reporters and editors are like almost all other humans – they follow the herd. Indeed, one could argue that news is merely “I herd it through the grapevine”, with each journalist (or social media “influencer”) reporting on those matters that other reporters are covering. What about their constant quest for the “scoop”? That’s new news within the same general subject area: politics!

A third factor turns the mirror from journalists to each of us, the news consumer. Human beings are invariably “here and now” creatures. From an evolutionary standpoint (until the modern age), there were too many present obstacles and dangers to contend with; thinking about “the future” was a luxury that almost none could afford (which is why Pharaoh was so taken aback by, and taken with, Joseph’s highly unusual plan to save grain for 7-14 years hence). And on top of that, predicting the future was such an “iffy” affair that other than professional “predictors” (oracles, prophets, seers etc.), no one even tried it.

Given this built-in human myopia, it is hardly surprising that journalists too would focus on the immediate present – not only because most understand the “iffiness” of future prognostication, but because their readers, listeners, and viewers just can’t get too worked up over the “future.” A perfect example: it has taken decades for journalism to really start focusing on global warming and other serious environmental issues – in large part due to the “ho-hum” response of its audience to bad things that will take place “decades from now.” When did the “environment” finally get serious public and journalistic traction? When the politicians started fighting over it!

In short, getting journalists to consistently focus on any serious or significant topic is a lost cause – unless someone (economists, scientists, pressure groups) can turn it into a “political issue.” This “topic myopia” is certainly short-sighted (by definition), but it’s what we – journalists and public alike – have been trained and accustomed to.

To conclude on a personal note: by focusing most of my academic work on political science and mass communications I made the correct professional decision. But that does not mean that in practice combining the two should be the be-all and end-all of most of our news production and consumption practices.

[Next week I’ll delve more deeply into this issue – with a solution of sorts.]