Larry D. Lauer

This week my head is swirling with questions: Did the founding followers think that the future of our republic depends on voters who are educated about the issues? Does the news media have a responsibility to help deliver that education? If not, who does?

In a 24/7 cable news world does endless sound bites of  Trump, Trump, Trump, create a sense of inevitability about the outcome? Is it OK to allow one candidate to dominate news coverage thereby requiring the other candidates to compete for coverage by creating their own outrageous moments?

Some communication academics argue that news organizations determine the social issues agenda by what they chooses to cover. Then individual peer groups determine what people think. Are today’s news media outlets setting an agenda that would please the founding fathers?

Wolf Blitzer on CNN this week said that this week’s debate is now about who will not appear. But is there any news media responsibility here to respond by focusing on an agenda of issues that need to be addressed substantively?

So the issue really is: What is the definition of “news” in a commercially competitive, fast-paced, 24/7 news media world?  Is it mostly the excitement of the race itself, i.e. the drama of intense conflict, name-calling and polarization?

In the final analysis, I can only conclude that in today’s new media world citizens are on their own to educate themselves about the substance of candidates… and understanding the dynamics of this digital-driven information implosion environment is critically important to their ability to do so.

So where in society should this public policy knowledge be strengthened, and media literacy education take place? The public schools? Universities? Community groups? How do we make it happen? And should news media organizations at least do a better job of educating their audiences about themselves?