Larry D. Lauer

The one thing that characterized 2016 more than anything was a complete breakdown in political communication. Cool Hand Luke’s famous line “What we have here is a failure to communicate” was a reality every day in every way.

While communication always breaks down initially, some understanding is possible over time with clarity, consistency and persistence. Between a constant flow of lies, fake news, 24/7 breaking news clutter, and politician initiated miscommunication, the citizen consumer had no frame of reference  from which to understand much of anything.

Responding to the belief that Americans are tired of assuming the burden of other countries’ wars, Obama began a policy of seeking to form coalitions of countries to assume the responsibility. When that was not working well enough many pundits criticized, and then later suggested much the same thing.

Mr. Trump was one of those critics, yet much of his attacks amounted to a series of daily contradictions. CNN defended its out-of-balance coverage of the Trump “rallies” by arguing that his outrageous comments were always news and had to be covered and fact-checked. But we quickly learned in 2016 that after the rally fact-checking never gets back into the news strong enough to correct the situation.

Reporting remarks about building a wall between the US and Mexico, immediately eliminating ISIS, fixing inner city problems, belittling the UN, threatening NATO support, etc. without explaining implications and contradictions suggests the need for a whole new approach to journalism.

For example, is it responsible to give Mr. Putin credit for achieving a ceasefire in Syria as if it’s a victory over the US when he authorized air strikes in Syria that killed thousands of innocent civilians and children to achieve it?  Too many reports had a dramatic tone of declaring a winner who sidelined the US, rather than communicating the complexity and contradictions of the total situation. One analyst reinforced this misleading tone by suggesting that Putin will continue hacking because he is winning and outscoring the US.

In the past, balanced television reporting was simply putting both sides on camera and letting them argue. In the digital age, however, this has only led to extreme polarization, outrageous remarks, lies, and consumer confusion.

2017 will require the news media to think beyond the headline potential of outrageous remarks and tweets. The main lesson of 2016 teaches us that politics and policy can no longer just be about star making and personality contests. We must now focus on evaluating the substance of ideas… and we will need the help of very smart journalists to do it.