Race-Baiter: How The Media Wields Dangerous Words To Divide A Nation
by Eric Deggans

Gone is the era of Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite, when news programs fought to gain the trust and respect of a wide spectrum of American viewers.

Today, the fastest-growing news programs and media platforms are fighting hard for increasingly narrow segments of the public and playing on old prejudices and deep-rooted fears, coloring the conversation in the blogosphere and the cable news chatter to distract from the true issues at stake. Using the same tactics once used to mobilize political parties and committed voters, they send their fans coded messages and demonize opposing groups, in the process securing valuable audience share and website traffic.

Race-baiter is a term born out of this tumultuous climate, coined by the conservative media to describe a person who uses racial tensions to arouse the passion and ire of a particular demographic. Even as the election of the first black president forces us all to reevaluate how we think about race, gender, culture, and class lines, some areas of modern media are working hard to push the same old buttons of conflict and division for new purposes. In Race-Baiter, veteran journalist and media critic Eric Deggans dissects the powerful ways modern media feeds fears, prejudices, and hate, while also tracing the history of the word and its consequences, intended or otherwise.

Related Links

What can be learned from media coverage of 2012 election

By Eric Deggans, Times TV/Media Critic
In Print: Monday, November 5, 2012

"It certainly brings about a feeling of exhaustion," said Dylan Byers, who covers media for POLITICO, noting the Internet-fueled 24/7 news cycle has increased the flow of stories and pushed journalists hard this election season. "Because of how fast the media moves now, there’s greater demand for news coverage than there are stories. People are going to look back, and perhaps wish they had spent more time on bigger pieces with greater impact."

Excerpts from the article: (Read the full article)

1.  Social media smartens up and dumbs down the coverage.
   
   "Do I think ’binders full of women’ was the most substantive thing said during the debate? No, obviously not," Byers added. "Is it worthwhile to have a conversation about equality in the workplace? Absolutely."
   
2. The political press has a tough time putting issues on the national news agenda if neither candidate wants to talk about them.
   
   Critics pointed out that the presidential campaigns and even the televised debates missed addressing a host of important issues, from the rise of poverty rates during the recession to questions on climate change, pollution and the environment.
   
3. News consumers don’t just want fact-checking, they want truth-checking.
   
   Facts can be easier to verify. But judging what a collection of facts means often requires making a judgment call…

Join in on the discussion abut this artice with AALBC.com