As the current media landscape faces significant challenges such as layoffs, loss of readership, and waning public trust, there’s a call from some quarters for the press to rediscover its “swagger.” Advocates of this notion claim that the media needs to shed its current timidity and embrace a bolder approach in tackling issues and challenging those in power. However, what the media truly needs in these troubled times is not swagger but humility, courage, and the willingness to question its own assumptions.
Max Tani, a media reporter for Semafor, laid out the current media predicament in a recent column. He describes a landscape once brimming with fearless exposés, aggressive investigations, and feral confrontations, now diluted by fears of litigation and the spiraling costs of insurance. This situation has left many stories untold and reduced the number of publications with the requisite resources or guts to confront those in power. His insights were echoed by Jack Shafer of Politico, who lamented that American journalism seems to be losing its essential quality of “swagger,” a historically defiant spirit essential for challenging authority and telling the complete truth regardless of whom it might offend.
The problem with Tani’s and Shafer’s perspective is that it ignores the significant ideological bias that has infiltrated mainstream media. The claim that the press has lost its swagger is incomplete without acknowledging that much of the media today fears engaging with conservative viewpoints or scrutinizing leftist narratives. For instance, despite the loud calls for daring journalism, notable mainstream outlets like Politico, The Washington Post, and The New York Times have avoided mentioning my book, *The Devil’s Triangle,* which exposes a 2018 plot against then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
The reluctance to review or cover such works indicates a selective bravery that only targets particular ideologies while shielding others. True journalistic valor would mean the willingness to cover stories irrespective of partisan leanings, and to present all sides fairly and fearlessly. There are glaring instances where the media has shied away from this. When my book was finally noted, it was only because Washington Post’s Kathleen Parker chose to call her colleagues out on their oversight.
My experiences underline the vital lessons about what journalism should strive to be — not just bold and brazenly confrontational but grounded in fairness, accuracy, and humility. The wisdom imparted by C.D.B. Bryan, the late author of *Friendly Fire,* is instructive. Bryan stood as a paragon of honesty, courage, and the reflective humility necessary to report truthfully. His 1976 response to a critical review by Diane Johnson in *The New York Review of Books* exemplifies the spirit needed in journalism. Bryan defended his portrayal of a family devastated by a son’s death from friendly fire in Vietnam against accusations of condescension, demonstrating profound empathy and an unwavering commitment to truth.
Today’s media can learn from Bryan’s approach. It needs humility, courage, and fairness to all perspectives, not just those that fit a certain narrative. Journalistic integrity demands more than swagger; it requires a reflective and balanced pursuit of truth, even at the risk of offending prevailing ideologies within one’s own community. This conscientious and unbiased journalism is what will ultimately restore public trust and revitalize the press. By focusing on genuine courage and humility over mere bravado, the media can reclaim its role as a principled and trusted pillar of democracy, countering the dominant leftist narratives with fairness and accuracy.
