Notes on the Late-Capitalist Media Paradox
(Elucidated by @Dril)

The 2016 election shattered many illusions about the fundamental pillars of American democracy, and no entity faced a greater rebuke than the mainstream media. Easily Trump’s favorite target, and besieged by Russian trolls and social media manipulation, the media’s credibility was damaged from all sides. In response, it has doubled-down on its image as a valiant defender of truth and order. As democratic norms crumble in real time, the late-capitalist media takes greater pride as a bastion of stability, even as its business models face stronger headwinds and public trust in the institution rapidly disintegrates.

Growing trends in online media (data mining, explainer journalism) seek refuge in metrics, the calm agnostic truth of seemingly unassailable data. But this has failed both objectively and commercially. FiveThirtyEight, the data-forward web property of former New York Times number-cruncher and famously accurate election predictor Nate Silver, is on the chopping block after failing to get the kind of audience reach expected of ESPN, the property’s owner. FiveThirtyEight projected Clinton to win in 2016, but delicately hedged by noting Trump was within the margin of error.

The cornerstone of traditional media respectability is objectivity: thorough reportage and unbiased evaluation, culminating in a profoundly balanced product. Outlets that proudly tout their ideological bent may be more solvent, but those upholding the goal of speaking truth to power find it necessary to represent “both sides”. But as mainstream discourse is rapidly poisoned from the bottom-up and the top-down, the mainstream media must assume increasingly perilous contortions to maintain this critical virtue.

This hands an advantage to the savvy, or at least shameless, late capitalist media subject, especially those with power who face scrutiny. Previously, subjects of criticism would be outmatched by credible accusations. Now, any wrongdoing can be waved off by simply not admitting shame, followed by doubling-down and casting doubt on the media’s intentions. Kettle logic (“I didn’t do it, but if I did, it’s not that bad anyway”) is the raison d’être of the successful late capitalist media subject.

There is no more successful subject to date than Teflon Don himself. The mainstream media is easily duped by bad faith actors who bend the objectivity paradox to their will, and no one has exploited this to their advantage more than the President. When attention and web traffic are the only motives for an industry that subsists on ad dollars, half-wit manipulators of the media’s hamstrung gaze need only do very little to prove the adage that “there’s no such thing as bad press”.

This weakness is also exploited by those without formal power who aim to seize it. The absurd assertions by the opportunistic can be presented on par with expert evaluations simply for being brazenly contrary or populist, aided by conservative “free speech” posturing. Plagued by long-standing accusations of liberal bias, the media grants leverage to extreme and malicious reactionary voices as long as they maintain respectable presentation and own their role as an equal counterweight in the pageantry of objective discourse.

Its ability to meaningfully critique centers of power weakening, the media is unable to construct baseline narratives to address systemic contradictions that emerge in late capitalism. Even further, the industry’s reliance on clicks and page views leads to manufactured outrage about topics only tacitly related to the deeper underlying conflicts of race and class struggle.

All of this is fuel for the “fake news” epidemic. As social media becomes the town square for much of a populace that is not online-native, even those with sophisticated media literacy fall prey to deceptive headlines and clickbait which gain traction among self-selecting audiences, surfacing once-subliminal prejudices, reinforcing reactionary talking points, and proffering unsubstantiated claims in a hive where sensational narratives easily outstrip any efforts to debunk them. Torn between wanting to ignore fringe discourse while also shouldering the responsibility to dispel false narratives, the binary of objectivity is ravaged by the instant news cycle, easily gamed by salacious tidbits of half-truth and bias-affirming speculation.

The inescapability of ideology, the impotence of objective posturing, and the tendency of online platforms to flatten all content (regardless of its source) onto an equal level of legitimacy have all rendered any distinction between “media” and “social media” irrelevant to the end user: the information-addled late capitalist media consumer. Receiving instant commentary from their overstuffed news feed, encouraged with affirmative “likes” from friends and family, the consumer feels anything but uninformed.