JULY 23, 2022 – Is “breaking news” making you crazy? Try consuming only “financial journalism.”
First, if we were to follow only news reported by financial media—e.g. Bloomberg, Financial Times, The Wall Street Journal—soon half the population would be snoring in la-la land. The calming effect on society would be transformative.
Second, the remaining half of the population would realize that James Carville—Bill Clinton’s leading political advisor—was right when he said in the 1992 campaign, “It’s the economy, stupid.” Like it or not; whether we’re “money-oriented” people or hold such folks in contempt, money spins the globe. Money and what it represents for survival and aspirations well beyond survival are as central to our existence as food, water, and oxygen. This view of “money” and the “dismal science” is the operating axiom of financial journalism.
Third, “It’s the economy, stupid” is only one side of the coin of the realm. If that side is as Carville famously stated, the flip side is, “The economy’s affected by lots of factors, smarty-pants.” Accordingly, “financial news” covers much more than labor statistics, retail sales, manufacturing output, and moves in debt and equity market indices. Some of the best reporting (outside technical sources) on advances in science and technology appears in financial news. Even trends in the arts and culture find sophisticated coverage in financial journalism.
However—and this is key to our sanity—political reporting in financial news tends to be less incendiary, less sensationalized. Politics isn’t ignored, because of course, legislation, court decisions, and executive directives and administrative actions all have a strong bearing on the economy. To suggest that politics can be ignored with regard to government policy is as naive as thinking physics can be understood without the language of math. All government action is “political”—as well it should be in a functioning democracy: only under authoritarianism is give-and-take among competing groups irrelevant to understanding government policies.
In America, non-financial news media are driven by incendiary politics. This condition—ironically—is because of . . . money. Despite disingenuous representations (e.g. “fair and balanced”) to the contrary, each outlet has an intentional “spin,” and that’s an algorithmic function of a targeted audience. This business model is lucratively circular: a market segment with a defined profile is fed “spin” designed to trigger an appetite for more of the same diet, which, in turn, fans the flames fueled by the outlet. The financial bonanza for the outlet burns out of control, and we news junkies run around with our hair on fire.
The effect on our democracy is to shove people into one steamed-up corner or another until everyone is raving mad and the media establishments are laughing all the way to the bank. This lopsided feast of sizzling red meat can’t end well.
But here’s the good news: in theory, at least, we the people have total control over what we consume. To borrow from Carville . . . “It’s our appetite for steaks, stupid!”
(Remember to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.)
© 2022 by Eric Nilsson
