You Can’t Handle the Truth

 "You Can’t Handle the Truth."

The quote above was uttered in the 1992 movie, A Few Good Men.  When Col. Nathan R. Jessup, played by Jack Nicholson, was caught in a courtroom lie, he used those words to defend his actions because he had deemed the real truth to be too sensitive.  Yes, the truth is sometimes painful and hard to come by, but the truth is still the truth.  In our modern era we are besieged with information, some truthful, some false, and sometimes a clever mixture of the two.  Filtering truth from fiction can be a difficult task, particularly when that information comes from someone with a platform.

 

Historically, we had limited sources of information.  We had the old standards of the press and radio.  Then, sometime in the 50s, television entered the scene.  At that point there were but three networks, ABC, CBS, and NBC.  Sometime in the early evening hours we tuned to our favorites.  We had Douglas Edwards, Walter Cronkite, Edward R. Murrow, John Cameron Swayze, Chet Huntley, David Brinkley, and Mike Wallace.   

 

Douglas Edwards 1952

These reporters reported the facts based on their research and with the integrity of their profession.  We trusted them to deliver facts and not misinformation.  When they provided opinions in editorials, they were generally made separately from “the news.”  A local South Florida broadcaster, Ralph Renick, used to conclude each news broadcast with the intro, “and now for tonight’s editorial.”  He would then provide his nightly opinion piece.

Ralph Renick, Miami News Broadcaster, WTVJ

 

Those were the “good old days” where the lines between fact and fiction, news and opinion, were made clear.  Today we are not so lucky.  We are inundated with news from hundreds, perhaps thousands of sources.  We have 24/7 television news channels commingled with social media via the Internet.  We still have newspapers, magazines, and radio.  More recently, we have seen our president use his bully pulpit, in keeping with its name, to become the loudest bully in the nation.  It is a cacophony of information with an inordinate emphasis on phony.  It is the First Amendment on steroids and Adderall.

Without infringing on our cherished right of free speech, what can we do to discern fact from fiction?  What information can we trust?  How can we curb the type of misinformation that brought about the recent attempt to overthrow our elected government?  In the short term, we must rely on research using historically trusted sources.  Trust but verify, then verify again.  This solves the problem for those who want to hear the facts and not a reinforcement of deeply held beliefs.  For others who lack the intelligence or motivation to discover the truth, there will always be those who would exploit that weakness.  Freedom means many things and one of those is that we must allow all to participate in our national discussion.

Perhaps there is a long-term solution that would improve matters.  We eat steaks that are inspected and graded by a government agency.  We have truth in lending for our mortgages.  We drink water that is tested and delivered by trusted sources.  We also have Underwriters Laboratories that tests the latest products and technologies for safety before they are marketed around the world.  This latter entity is a US based global safety science company which happens to be the largest and oldest independent testing lab in the United States.  It was founded in 1894.  While there are no laws mandating UL approval of a product, many municipalities have codes that require a product be tested by such a company before it can be sold in their area.  We could use such an approval rating agency for our major networks and critical news sources.

Underwriters Laboratories certificate for a fire door

 

I would propose that a singular US based agency, similar in function to UL, be established to provide a “seal of approval” for news sources.  This private entity would regularly test the validity of a wide variety of news sources and provide those who meet their standards with their approval.  This would not be mandatory but perhaps desirable enough to have news sources seek that approval.  News media would be required to classify their programming or other output as either news or opinion.  Misinformation and dissemination of falsehoods and conspiracy theories could not be made or promoted as fact.  In such an environment a broadcaster like Chris Wallace might get a high rating where Sean Hannity or Laura Ingraham would have no approval from the agency.  This would be in spite of the fact that they all work for the same broadcaster.  If Chris Wallace begins to spread rumors and innuendo, he might lose his approval rating.

Fact or Fake

 

In actuality, we already have such an agency as suggested here.  They would just need to move a bit further into the mainstream to improve their effectiveness.  That “agency” is the Poynter Institute for Media Studies.  Established in 1975, as a school of journalism called the Modern Media Institute by Nelson Poynter, they supported fact-checking technology, impact tracking, and financial awards.  In 2018, they began a cooperative effort with Revcontent, to stop misinformation and fake news articles.  They launched IFCN, the International Fact Checking Network with a code of ethics for fact-checking organizations and they issue certifications to publishers who must pass an audit of their content.  Certification lasts one year, and fact-checkers must be certified annually.  They regularly use Annenberg Public Policy Center, Merrimack College, PolitiFact, and Snopes to identify unreliable news sources.

PolitiFacts. Truth-O-Meter

 

We have a long way to go before Poynter or some other agency becomes a universally accepted approval center for truth and reliable information.  In the meantime, we will all need to use those tools at our disposal to verify our information.  My personal policy is to fact-check everything before I post a statement as fact, clearly mark opinions as such, and refrain from re-posting anything before sourcing is verified.  This solves my problem but does nothing for the lazy.  We CAN handle the truth; in fact we must demand it.

We can only hope that, with a new president in office, who is not known for spreading lies, we can at least return to a pre-Trump era where facts take precedence over lies.  We should never again hear Rudy Giuliani claim that, “the truth is not the truth.”  In what sort of Alice in Wonderland universe does that man reside?  I want the name of his hookah smoking caterpillar. 

Hookah Smoking Caterpillar