The Media Watch Dog
Stephen M Gross
Introduction
When analyzing the watch dog role of the media it is important to note the
power of agenda setting in a democracy, and that the media can play a key role in
ensuring that elites do not ignore the concerns of average citizens in setting the
agenda. E. E. Schattschneider’s analysis warns that “(t)he unforgivable sin of
democratic politics is to dissipate the power of the public by putting it to trivial uses .”
(Shchattschneider, 1975) This is why the struggle over issue saliency is so important .
The media’s watch dog role is paramount to making sure that the public and private
elites make the important issues salient to the public, thus, holding them more
accountable.
This paper will look to examine the media’s role as government watch dog by
answering the question of how to hold elites more accountable. Reporters can be
hold elites more accountable by being more objective (providing fair and balanced
news). It will also examine things such as intentionally misleading news and the
exploitation of reporters work routines, as roadblocks, making it difficult for reporters
to act as government watch dogs. It will also examine some positive trends like fact
checking, blogging and social networking. To the recent development of these
positive trends we can look to see an increase in the ability for reporters to act as a
1|Page
The Media Watch Dog
Stephen M Gross
watch dog. Fact checking and social networking provide a cheaper and less time
consuming method for investigative and critical reporting.
In order to examine the media’s role as watch dog, we must first attempt to
define the role. A watch dog reporter will use investigative reporting designed to hold
powerful public, as well as private sector elites accountable. In order to hold the
elites accountable, reporters look to be the watch dog, and avoid simply being an
unchecked microphone for the elites. Watch dog style reporting, however, can often
be expensive and time consuming. For this reason, it is often discouraged by editors
and publishers, and often leads to reporters being at odds with their bosses .
Reporters, and sometimes their bosses, are also at odds with elected officials whom
reporters rely on for the information necessary to write their stories and serve as the
authoritative voice required to demonstrate a reporter’s objectivity . These dynamics
between the media and elites create a struggle over the news.
Accountability
As discussed earlier, a reporter attempting to be a media watch dog looks to
utilize an investigative style of reporting to hold elected officials and private elites
more accountable. What can be done by reporters to try and hold elected officials
and private elites more accountable? They can try to be more objective in their
2|Page
The Media Watch Dog
Stephen M Gross
writing. Media scholar Lance Bennett suggest that, by using ideas such as fairness and
balance in their reporting, reporters can be more objective.
Fairness in reporting implies that both sides are given equal time, presenting
facts given from both view points. (Bennett, 2005) When a journalist offers more
than one side to the story he or she is presenting, it makes the story seem more
objective. It allows multiple sides of an argument to be heard, and in theory allow the
voter to make their own conclusions about the argument presented. It also helps to
keep government officials accountable by not allowing one side of the story to
become more salient than another, and forcing them to answer questions brought up
by the other side of the argument.
Trying to balance these competing objectives can be difficult at times . As
Bennett points out, there are often more than two sides two each argument. This is
another example of the struggle existing between the different actors in trying to
make their view point salient, which makes the job of the reporter that much more
difficult. Another aspect of fairness in journalism is the idea of giving equal time to
the different sides of the issue. This does pose an issue explained by Bennett. When a
new idea or solution to a problem becomes available, that idea will need more time
to be explained and defended than old solutions to problems . However, providing
3|Page
The Media Watch Dog
Stephen M Gross
equal time and highlighting the two major sides to a debate allows that reporter to
present a more objective story to his or her readers, and also aids in the quest of
making elites more accountable.
There is a history of attempts to try and mandate fairness out of reporters.
The Fairness Doctrine, introduced by the FCC in 1949, required that reports present
controversial issues of public importance in a manner that was honest, equitable and
balanced. The FCC mandated that there be an equal opportunity for opposing
viewpoints to be expressed. Although much of the regulations set by the Fairness
Doctrine were rescinded by the Reagan administration, public opinion polls show that
norms created by the Fairness Doctrine have stuck . A 2008 poll conducted by
Rasmussen Reports shows that 47% of voters polled believed that there should be
government mandated political balance in the news, while only 39% were against the
regulation.
Misleading News Weakens Accountability
Often times, reporters rely on the government officials to provide them with
access to the information necessary to present news to the public . However there are
examples of times when the elected officials and private elites take advantage of this
4|Page
The Media Watch Dog
Stephen M Gross
and provide reporters with false claims, or take advantage of journalist’s work
routines to exaggerate “facts”. This weakens the media’s ability to perform its
government watchdog role and keep the elites accountable.
Due to the fact that reporting in-depth, critical analysis can be very time
consuming and expensive, journalists have acquired work routines to help them get
the latest news to the people. These work routines rely on journalistic beats and
habits. These routines promote consistency and credibility to their work. (Haltom,
2004) These work routines are able to be exploited by elected officials, and corporate
elites, like the in the cases I examine next.
An example of the misconceptions evolving due to elected officials providing
misleading information to the media is highlighted in the article entitled
“Misperceptions, the Media, and the Iraq War” . Through the media, the
administration was able to convince large portions of the public of several
misconceptions involving the happenings in Iraq.
The authors examined three main misconceptions: 1. The United States had
found Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, 2 . Saddam Hussein was in dealings with
al Qaeda, and 3. The rest of the world’s view was in favor of the U.S. entering Iraq.
The administration was very successful in persuading some American people that one
5|Page
The Media Watch Dog
Stephen M Gross
if not all of these falsehoods were very much true, and that the U.S. should move into
Iraq. By pumping journalists with false information, the administration was able to
take advantage of reporters’ work routines and create misconceptions among the
public.
David Paletz explains yet another example of how the administration was able
to set the agenda to get the people to talk about what they wanted. The study found
that the topic of the Gulf War “put at the top of the agenda far more by the actions
and statements of Bush and Hussein than anything the media did.” (Paletz, 2001) This
is a great example of government officials manipulating the media system to set the
agenda they wish to be made salient.
William Hamilton and Michael McCann uncovered another instance where the
public developed misconceptions due to the exploitation of work routines in the
news media. Readers in the 1980s and 1990s were led to believe that America was
going through a litigation explosion. Even though American courts did see an increase
in tort filings, the growth rate was under that of population growth over that same
time period. Even the amount of money won by plaintiffs was exaggerated. For
example, 65% of articles reported settlements yielding payouts of over $100 million
dollars, well above the actual number of settlements that size. By using the media,
6|Page
The Media Watch Dog
Stephen M Gross
powerful elites were able to “fabricate common sense”, thus creating a push for tort
reform.
These examples of providing misinformation to the media by corporate elites
and elected officials are instances of the exploitation of media work routines to set
the public agenda. This is not to say that the media is completely without fault. The
Tort Reform study explains that “the press is more likely to provide coverage – and
likely to provide more coverage – to those stories in which news worth is found or
into which it may be injected.” (Haltom, 2004) This explains why the media was more
inclined to write on cases where there were big payouts, or why there seemed to be
more tort cases flooding our courts. These stories make better news than a story of
small payouts or a zero growth rate in the number of filed case. However, the media
does rely on the information given to them by the elites . The media’s ability to
perform the watchdog role becomes hindered when the information it relies on to
report the news is false or misleading. They media have difficulty finding a way of
preventing the transmission of misinformation, and it seems we will continue to see
misrepresentations and development of misconceptions into the future.
7|Page
The Media Watch Dog
Stephen M Gross
Fact Checking and Social Networking Increase Accountability
We have examined how misinformation can weaken the media’s ability to
keep the elites accountable. However, we have recently seen fact checking and the
use of social networking as counter trends . The media is able to use these resources
to hold elected officials and corporate elites accountable.
Recently there was a great example of how social networking web sites can
have a tremendous affect on politics. Revolutionaries in Egypt were able to use sites
like Twitter and Facebook to organize demonstrations, and disseminate information
about the revolution. Information on these sites moves rapidly. Social networks had
such an effect on the revolution that the Egyptian government went as far as to shut
down the internet. The Egyptian revolution is an ultimate example of holding an
administration responsible, and Twitter played a major role in doing so.
We have also seen an increase in organizations like FactCheck.org and
Accuracy in Media who monitor what our elected officials say and what is printed in
our news to make sure that these facts are correct . These organizations provide a
new resource for reporters as well, giving them an outlet to check the facts presented
to them by their sources.
8|Page
The Media Watch Dog
Stephen M Gross
Fact Checking and Social Networks could potentially be an answer to the
misinformation issue explained earlier. They are tools for the media to be able to use
to help them in the battle over issue saliency, and fulfill the role of government
watchdog.
Conclusions
The struggle over issue saliency (agenda setting), creates a fluid dynamic
between the media and elected officials . The watch dog role of the media includes
conducting investigative reporting to ensure the accountability of our government
and corporate elites. Often, however, the media requires information from these
same elites in order to write their stories. This is where we get the constant battle
going on between the reporters and elected officials, who are often at odds with each
other.
One way for reporters to try and hold our elites more accountable is by being
more objective. Fairness and balance in their reporting can help reporters achieve a
more objective story. By ensuring the more than one side is being represented, and
adequate time is given to all sides present reporters can come closer to achieving the
fair and balanced news reporting, consistent to that of a watch dog style of reporting.
9|Page
The Media Watch Dog
Stephen M Gross
In a 2009 study done by the Pew Research Center, the public’s opinion on
news accuracy has declined dramatically over the past twenty-four years. Today
“(j)ust 29% of Americans say that news organizations generally get the facts straight,
while 63% say that news stories are often inaccurate.” (2009, Pew Research) When
we look at these statistics we must also remember that much of what is being
reported are facts that came from sources in the government and from corporate
elites. The analysis of misleading news shows that often times, public administrations
and private corporations look to purposely deceive the news media in order to make
their issues salient. These issues sometimes can lead to misconceptions developed by
the public. However, counter trends have recently began to take shape. Fact checking
and social networking sites have become tools for reporters to use to increase the
accountability of the elites, making it easier for the reporters to practice watch dog
style reporting.
This analysis leads me to conclude that political and social elites do not want
to be watched, and will look to mislead the public in order to make their issues salient
among the people. The often do this by exploiting the nature of reporting, and
reporters work routines. This makes watchdog reporting difficult and frustrating.
However, with the progression of fact checking organizations and social networking
10 | P a g e
The Media Watch Dog
Stephen M Gross
sites, we could potentially see a new wave of watch dog reporting. It will become less
and less time consuming and expensive for reporters to conduct the investigative and
critical style of reporting necessary to perform the watch dog function.
11 | P a g e
The Media Watch Dog
Stephen M Gross
Works Cited
Bennett, W. Lance (2005). News: The Politics of Illusion. New York: Pearson
Education.
Haltom, W., & McCann, M. (2004). Distorting the law: Politics, Media, and The
Litigation Crisis. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Kull, Steven, Clay Ramsey, Evan Lewis (2003) . Misperceptions, the Media, and the
Iraq War Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 118, No. 4, p. 569 – 598.
Paletz, David L. (2001). The Media in American Politics: Contents and Consequences.
New York: Longman.
Pew Research Center (2009). Press Accuracy Rating Hits Two Decade Low. (Pew
Research Center).
Schattschneider, E. E. (1975). The Semisovereign People. Wadsworth Publishing.
12 | P a g e