Adolphe Bernotas (Monitor Opinion, June 15) wonders why half of the population view journalists and even local newspapers in a negative light.
A March Gallup poll revealed that overall, Americans approved of how institutions and leaders were handling the COVID-19 epidemic. The exception was the media, with only 44% of the respondents approving of their coverage.
Media has devolved into creating a narrative that represents the political ideology of their leadership, publishers, editors, and staff at both broadcast and print media; infusing personal bias into what should be fact-based, emotion-free reporting.
A few years ago, a former Monitor editor wrote that they work very hard to ensure that opinion does not bleed into the news and try to balance the opinion page. That was somewhat true then; not at all true with the Monitor today.
Current Monitor leadership crafts obvious narratives through the choice and placement of stories, tone of reporting, choice of news sources, and ever-repetitive messages in every column, supplying confirmation bias for the targeted readership they profess to “serve.”
Based on voter turnout in 2016 about half of their potential readership is underserved by the Monitor narrative; how many subscribers to print/digital are lost, how many businesses won’t support them through advertisements and how many people, in protest, refuse to trade with their staunch advertisers? My guess is that those potential revenue numbers are immense and grow as the Monitor continues its hard tilt to the left.
Bernotas might consider the devolution of journalistic balance for answers as to why newspapers in general are struggling.
BILL BUNKER
Barnstead