Episodit
-
I think this short episode is so important that I’m making it available to everyone, not just paid subscribers, as usual. Please have a listen.
This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit margaretsullivan.substack.com/subscribe -
As I wrap up Season One of “American Crisis: Can Journalism Save Democracy?” I’m especially delighted to offer all subscribers this conversation with Garrett Graff, the brilliant author of “Watergate: A New History.”
He really is the perfect person to cap off all we’ve been talking about because he’s a serious student of both the Watergate scandal and the events that preceded and followed Jan. 6, 2021. I was particularly struck by his observation that — while we know how Watergate ended — we don’t know, right now, if we’re at the beginning, middle or end of the Trump era.
Graff’s observations, knowledge and ability to synthesize opened my eyes and changed my mind about some aspects of this subject. I hope you’ll appreciate it as much as I did.
Please note: This newsletter will continue — only the audio portions are taking a break, with the possibility of a Season Two podcast that will be more focused on the looming presidential election. You’ll continue to receive my media-criticism posts, as well as some broader reporting and commentary. I’ll continue to look for, and respond to, your comments below each post.
A short bonus episode with Garrett Graff will drop on Friday. I’m making them both free to all.
As for the question we’ve been exploring — can journalism save democracy? — my answer at this point is “not all by itself.” In other words, journalism is necessary to sustaining democracy but not sufficient, as Graff explains so eloquently here.
Thanks for coming along for this ride, and please don’t go away. There’s much more to come!
This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit margaretsullivan.substack.com/subscribe -
Puuttuva jakso?
-
Of all the people I’ve interviewed for American Crisis — Carl Bernstein, Ruth Ben-Ghiat, Molly Jong-Fast and others — Steve Inskeep is probably the least alarmed about this moment in American history. He’s far less alarmed than I am, in fact.
He brings to bear on this question his many years as a journalist, including covering the Pentagon, George W. Bush’s 2000 presidential campaign, and the U.S. Senate. He’s been the host of Weekend All Things Considered and Morning Edition. A student of American history and a native of Indiana, he has written four books, the most recent of which will be published in about two weeks — “Differ We Must: How Lincoln Succeeded in a Divided America.”
As you’ll hear on Episode 9, the longtime Morning Edition host takes the long view, informed not only by his own reporting but by his deep interest in the Civil War era. He’s also a believer in trying to understand the points of view of those with whom we disagree; we may not come to a meeting of the minds, he realizes, but at least we’ll truly get what others are trying to say.
Let me know in the comments below whether you think Inskeep is on target, and whether we in 2023 have something to learn from Lincoln’s wily approach to dealing with his critics and adversaries.
American Crisis is a community-supported project where I explore how journalism can help save democracy. I’ll be donating any net proceeds to two wonderful journalism organizations for the first month, so please consider joining us.
Speaking of Lincoln, I want to let you know that I’ll be doing a live conversation with fellow Substacker Steve Schmidt, the corporate and political strategist who co-founded the anti-Trump super-PAC known as the Lincoln Project. We’ll no doubt be discussing media coverage of the presidential campaign and a bunch of other things. You can register for the event (which is available only to paid subscribers to Steve’s The Warning newsletter) here:
Next up on my American Crisis podcast — free to all my subscribers — is historian Garrett Graff, who wrote the excellent book, published last year, “Watergate: A New History.” I’m a big fan of Garrett’s commentary and an admirer of his knowledge, so I’m really looking forward to this one. Please look for it in two weeks.
This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit margaretsullivan.substack.com/subscribe -
If you’re anything like me, you’re somewhere between disappointed and enraged at the state of the American news media today. The right-wing media spreads lies (and gets caught doing it, as in the whopping settlement that Fox News had to pay to a voting systems company). Meanwhile, the mainstream media fails us as it prioritizes demands for corporate profit over the public’s best interests, and constantly engages in performative neutrality so as not to offend anyone.
But what can be done? Is government regulation an option, given the importance of free speech and press rights? Today’s podcast is with an expert in media regulation — Philip M. Napoli, a distinguished professor at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy who also directs Duke’s DeWitt Wallace Center for Media and Democracy.
I’m happy to report that Phil and I are team-teaching a course at Duke this fall — starting next week! — called “Can Journalism Save Democracy?” That, of course, also happens to be the overall focus of my American Crisis podcast here on Substack. As we await the first meeting on Tuesday with 26 undergraduates (many of whom are public-policy, rather than journalism, students), Phil and I had a chance to chat about a number of issues plaguing journalism today.
I hope you’ll enjoy listening to our conversation, which touches on the now defunct Fairness Doctrine, how to deal with lies and disinformation, and whether there is any hope of restraining the harm done by Fox News.
Thanks so much for subscribing to American Crisis, which now has well over 5,000 subscribers. If you would like to help support my pro-democracy journalism and become part of the media-watchdog community I’m building here, you can become a paid subscriber at margaretsullivan.substack.com; the cost is $8 a month or $50 for the year. This will give you full access to all my media-criticism posts, to discussion threads and to the podcast, including all bonus episodes. Please let me know your thoughts about these subjects in the comments.
If you’d like to dig deeper into Phil Napoli’s excellent work, here are some examples:
Misinformation fueled the Jan. 6 riots. A Biden Commission could chart a path forward. (The Hill, with Bill Adair)
Lessons for Social Media from the Fairness Doctrine. (Columbia Journalism Review)
His 2019 book, Social Media and the Public Interest: Media Regulation in the Disinformation Age
This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit margaretsullivan.substack.com/subscribe -
In the past few weeks alone, student journalists have been on a remarkable roll.
Impressive reporting at The Stanford Daily led to the resignation of the university’s president. And, after an investigation into hazing rituals by The Daily Northwestern, that university fired fired its football coach because of his players’ alleged involvement.
“More than anything, to me, this should raise conversations about the value of student journalism,” Theo Baker, the investigations editor of the Stanford paper, told the New York Times. And there are many other instances over the years in which student journalists have held powerful people and institutions accountable.
That’s heartening, because it suggests that — despite the challenges of being a young journalist today — there’s a high level of talent and commitment among the practitioners who’ll soon be professional reporters.
At perhaps the nation’s premier training ground, the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, Dean Jelani Cobb is immersed in the future of journalism
And as a student of history, and an esteemed writer for the New Yorker magazine, he’s acutely aware of the need for young journalists to enter an uncertain field armed with the best possible skills and values.
I loved our conversation about how journalism has changed over the decades and how young journalists can anticipate — and be prepared — for what’s ahead. Let’s hope they are all of the caliber of those at Stanford and Northwestern who are already showing they know how to be effective watchdogs.
This post is free to all American Crisis subscribers, and I’m delighted to say that, after only a few weeks, there are now more than 5,000 of you! I am dedicated to doing pro-democracy work here. If you would like to help support it, please consider upgrading to a paid subscription for $50 a year. That will give you access to bonus podcast episodes and all of the media criticism I do here.
Thanks for all your kind words, thoughtful comments and support.
This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit margaretsullivan.substack.com/subscribe -
If we hadn’t all been worn down by the relentless turmoil of Donald Trump’s rise to political power, the events of recent weeks would be even harder to believe.
Even though we are somewhat jaded, the barrage of criminal indictments and ominous investigations still have the power to stun. But they haven’t stopped Trump’s drive to win the presidency again next year. If he prevails (and it’s very far from impossible), he has already been clear about what he wants to do: Change the rules so that American democracy looks much more like an authoritarian state.
American Crisis is a community-supported project where I explore how journalism can help save democracy. Please consider joining us!
The stakes of this moment are high. So my conversation with prominent constitutional lawyer and law professor Neal Katyal is a timely one. In addition to his impressive professional accomplishments, Neal is also a new Substack podcaster. As the host of Courtside, he takes up a different Supreme Court case each episode in conversation with celebrity guests including John Legend, Rob Reiner and Katie Couric.
In our conversation, I particularly appreciated how Neal puts today’s events in the context of Watergate — another hinge moment in American history. Like Trump, Nixon seemed to believe (and later declared) that the president is above the law.
Neal’s optimism, expressed at the end of the podcast, is inspiring. And his view of journalism’s role is on point. I hope you’ll enjoy the conversation and learn as much as I did.
I’m very grateful to the thousands of new subscribers to American Crisis. Particular thanks to those who have decided to support my work with a paid subscription, and in some cases, have sent me messages of appreciation. With the assault on truth, combined with the economic tumult of the media industry, this can be a discouraging time to be a journalist. So your kind words — along with your interest and attention here — mean the world to me.
This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit margaretsullivan.substack.com/subscribe -
A few days before the 2016 presidential election, the New Yorker magazine published a prescient interview with Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a scholar and historian with a particular interest in Mussolini. (She also writes the excellent Lucid newsletter here on Substack.)
“These people are mass marketers,” she said then about populist strongmen — including a certain presidential candidate. “They give the impression of talking directly to the people.” A few days later, of course, Donald Trump was elected, and the rest is, well, still-developing history.
A few days before the 2016 presidential election, the New Yorker magazine published a prescient interview with Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a scholar and historian with a particular interest in Mussolini. (She also writes the excellent Lucid newsletter here on Substack.)
“These people are mass marketers,” she said then about populist strongmen — including a certain presidential candidate. “They give the impression of talking directly to the people.” A few days later, of course, Donald Trump was elected, and the rest is, well, still-developing history.
I hope you’ll enjoy our conversation and learn as much from it as I did. I was relieved to hear her observations about some positive developments around the world as ordinary people push back against authoritarian threats to democracy. And I enjoyed hearing about a new project of hers that will follow her excellent 2020 book, “Strongmen: From Mussolini to the Present.”
I want to sincerely thank all the new subscribers to American Crisis, many of whom joined up this week after I published my first piece of media criticism here, under the tag “Media Maelstrom.” In that piece, I wrote about how the mainstream media adopts right-wing framing as a defense mechanism and the insidious damage that practice does; I gave recent examples of this failing from ABC News and the New York Times.
It came through loud and clear that you appreciate this and want to see more of it. To those of you who wrote a private message with your new paid subscriptions, telling me why you decided to support my work, please know that I read each one with deeply felt gratitude. And do stay tuned for more!
This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit margaretsullivan.substack.com/subscribe -
“Most people in this country are not open to what Woodward and I have called the best obtainable version of the truth.” Those are some tough words from Carl Bernstein — and you’ll hear them in this episode of American Crisis.
I grew up hero-worshiping Bernstein and his Washington Post reporting partner Bob Woodward. As a teenager, I joined my family in being glued to the Senate Watergate hearings on TV — which were, at least partially, the result of Woodstein’s reporting. Then, of course, there was the fabulous 1976 movie, “All the President’s Men,” in which Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford played the intrepid reporters, making investigative reporting look both glamorous and fulfilling.
During that era, when my eldest brother, David, asked me what I wanted to do with my life, our conversation yielded one obvious answer: journalism. Not long after that, I became the editor-in-chief of my high school newspaper, the Nardin Academy Kaleidoscope.
Decades later, I still seem to be carrying out that labor of love, including right here.
I write about this personal history in my recent memoir, NEWSROOM CONFIDENTIAL: Lessons (and Worries) from an Ink-stained Life. It includes a section on why the great Congresswoman, Barbara Jordan, who had such a memorable part in the Watergate saga, helped me untangle my mother’s confusingly mixed messages about how a woman should live her life.
Later in life, when I was more established as a journalist at the New York Times and the Washington Post, I would sometimes run into Carl in the green room at CNN or at a concert in New York City. (The fact that I also adored the work of his ex-wife, Nora Ephron, did not come up in conversation, admittedly. I also got to know their journalist son, Jacob Bernstein, who sat near me during my stint as the Times’s public editor and we have become friends.)
So let’s just say that I feel pretty connected to Carl in a lot of ways, and I have for many years.
It was a thrill to interview him for this episode. I wasn’t completely prepared for some of his answers, one of which I found pretty discouraging and one of which I found completely inspiring. Carl is a great, entertaining and rather intense talker, and I’m so glad to invite you to listen in.
I also want to share my new Guardian column on how American democracy is fortifying itself in some really important ways.
And most of all, I want to thank the thousands of subscribers to this podcast. I feel so privileged to have the gift of your time and attention (and, in some cases, your financial support)! Enjoy, and let me know in the comments what you think.
This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit margaretsullivan.substack.com/subscribe -
Asha Rangappa just about stopped me cold when I heard her answer to whether she considers American democracy in real trouble, and how worried she is.
Worried enough, this former FBI special agent told me, that she’s looking at colleges outside the United States for her children. Rangappa is an expert on misinformation and disinformation; she lectures on these subjects at Yale University and writes about them on her excellent Substack, The Freedom Academy, in which she offers her Yale course to her readers and subscribers.
We talked about the fraying of “social trust” that results when citizens don’t have a common basis of reality and facts. It’s not that facts don’t exist — they do. But not everyone wants to believe them.
Right-wing media is a big part of that, since as Asha describes it, there are very few checks on the misinformation that circulates there. That’s quite different from what happens in mainstream media, she says.
As it turns out, most Americans are also pretty worried about the direction of the nation, according to a new USA Today/Suffolk University poll. Seven in 10 of the respondents think democracy is “imperiled.” I strongly suspect people on the right and the left disagree about exactly what the problem is — whether it’s equal access to voting, lies about the 2020 election or the idea that politicians on the other side of the aisle are guilty of “weaponizing” political power.
The discussion I had with Asha reminded me of something I heard Democratic Congressman Jamie Raskin say a couple of years ago, in his 2021 role as lead House manager for Donald Trump’s second impeachment.
“Democracy needs a ground to stand upon — and that ground is the truth,” Raskin said in his opening statement, quoting his father, the political activist Marcus Raskin.
That’s right. But with a fractured and flawed news media, a former president who spreads lies about a rigged election, and a crucial presidential election looming, is the foundation still there?
Please enjoy the conversation between me and Asha. And to those who have signed up for American Crisis, please know that I’m deeply grateful for your interest and support. I’m really touched by some of the kind words I’ve heard from subscribers about my past work at the New York Times or the Washington Post. I plan to earn your trust here, too. Thanks for giving me that chance!
View all my posts, and prior episodes, on my Substack
This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit margaretsullivan.substack.com/subscribe -
I call this podcast American Crisis because I’m convinced our democracy -- like every democracy -- is fragile. It’s not simply a done deal, for all time. And over the past few years, American democracy come unacceptably close to the brink of failing.
Yes, we came through the aftermath of the 2020 election and the violent attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. But there’s still a lot to be worried about.
Consider this phrase in a new blockbuster Washington Post report: “a wariness about appearing partisan.” That fear was a big part of what made the FBI resist investigating Donald Trump’s role in the Jan. 6th insurrection. Stunningly, it took the agency more than a year to overcome that hesitancy, according to the story, despite all the obvious signs that Trump was the instigator.
And “a wariness about appearing partisan” is also behind a lot of the problems of journalism today. Reporters, their editors and their corporate bosses don’t want to look like they are choosing sides. They are afraid of being called liberal. They want to appear neutral at all costs, even if that means shying away from the obvious truth. Just as the FBI did. (And that’s not to mention the destructive role of right-wing media, specifically Fox News. A whole separate subject.)
But here’s the thing: If journalism isn’t brave – isn’t willing to take the heat – it can’t possibly do the job that it must do in a democracy: To fully inform the public so that citizens can, in turn, do their jobs of voting, protesting, advocating, etc.
In short, journalism’s main job is to hold powerful people and institutions accountable. But if we’re afraid of “appearing partisan,” we slip into a kind of performative neutrality, which is destructive and misleading.
I explore some of those concerns in the first episode of the podcast. Molly Jong-Fast -- the incisive author, pundit and writer -- sees both slow-moving and fast-moving threats, and she details them in our talk.
In the weeks ahead, I’ll talk with some fascinating people who share my concerns and bring their own specific expertise to bear. We’ll look at how dramatically media and politics have changed since an earlier “hinge moment” in American history, the Watergate scandal of the early 1970s, which culmimated in the resignation – under pressure – of President Richard Nixon. Would Watergate play out the same way today? Can today’s journalism help to save democracy? I have doubts, and I have hopes, too.
My guests will include former FBI special agent Asha Rangapa and the legendary journalist Carl Bernstein, who with Bob Woodward did the essential investigative Watergate reorting at the Washington Post.
I think there’s a lot to learn. So, please, come along for the ride.
What do you think about today’s journalism and what we’re talking about here? Stop by my Substack to join the discussion: margaretsullivan.substack.com
This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit margaretsullivan.substack.com/subscribe
