How the media distorts the
issues in the public school debates.
Reporters who are not experts on schools too often rely upon the wisdom of selected
“spokespersons” and other elites.
They have been sold a
framework of a corporate view of
accountability. Corporate sponsored networks and think tanks such as the the Thomas
B. Fordham Institute, the Broad Foundation, the Bradley Foundation, the Pacific Research Institute, and the Olin Foundation provide
“experts” prepared to give an opinion on short notice to meet a reporters
deadline. Most reporters assume
that these notables are telling the truth when in fact they are promoting a
particular propaganda such as in the film “Waiting for Superman”. Who do they not talk with? They fail to interview experienced
teachers and professionals who have worked for decades to improve the quality
of inner city schools.
The Obama Administration’s
appointment of Arne Duncan was symptomatic of the problem. He represents the kind of corporate/media approach to
reform. So, reporters can go
to the corporate funded foundations and provide “balance” by asking the
appointees of the government- they get the same story. In particular recently they have been
turning to the Gates and Broad Foundations or the conservative Democrats for Education Reform and
Michelle Rhee.
What the foundations and the Billionaires Boy’s Clubs are
saying is fundamentally misleading.
They are deliberately distorting the story. However reporters think that these foundations have smart
people so they must know what they are talking about. See Diane Ravitch. The Death and Life of the Great
American School System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education.
2010.
There are layers of influence that tell reporters what is
the “correct” side of the story.
Reporters seldom go to people who might provide an unsafe viewpoint-
like people who have worked in the schools for years. For more on this see Mike Rose. Why School?
Reporters typically develop sources and they writer for
these sources. They don’t want to offend their sources or to indicate that they don’t
understand the issues. Reporters
also know what the owners of the newspapers and journals think. And, except for journals of professional organizations,
the newspaper owners think very much like the Business Roundtable and the
Chamber of Commerce.
In the last twenty years media ownership has
become highly concentrated.
Now, reporters and editors are disturbed to learn that growing sectors
of the public do not trust their reporting. In particular teachers do not trust the reporting – it is so
often misinformed. This is an unconscious class bias of the media- looking up to
the selected expertise of those funded by the foundations and looking down on
everyday teachers and others actually working in the schools.
There is a well developed media structure focused on the think tanks and
foundations and revealed in the film Waiting for Superman and Won’t Back Down which regularly repeats a series of mis
information.
In Waiting for
Superman, the film maker distorts the needed discussion of school reform by
citing only one side of the debate- that of the Billionaire Boy’s Club and their well funded
spokespersons. The film decries
the teachers unions as a special interest while reporting on Bill Gates, the
Olin Foundation, the Bradley foundation, the Broad Foundation, and the entire
raft of very conservative economic interests as if they were neutral. They are not. Their declared interest is the shrink the public
sector – as in public schools- and to spend less money on tax supported
institutions. A second goal
of several of these foundations is to defeat the power of teachers unions and
the Democratic Party- that is the primary goal of Democrats for Education Reform. And, who do they represent ( see prior post)?
Blogging as if public
education mattered.
So, this blog along with several others has a viewpoint, and part of the
effort is to counter the opinions and perspectives of the Billionaire Boy’s
Clubs, the Democrats for Education reform, Michelle Rhee of Students First,
Mayor Kevin Johnson, and similar foundation funded efforts. The effort is to provide a variety of
views to counter the biased view of the general press.
For more on this topic see:
www.DemocracyEducationInstitute.org.
http://www.democracyeducationinstitute.org
www.dianeravitch.net/
www.dianeravitch.net/
There are, of course, others providing these
views also including the journals of the professional organizations and a few
notable bloggers such as the blog The Answer Sheet by Valerie Strauss at the
Washington Post http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/
http://www.susanohanian.org/index.php
http://www.susanohanian.org/index.php
And others.
The above post is based upon an interview with
veteran reporter and author William Greider. Social Security in
Perspective, Part III A
conversation with William Greider by Trudy Lieberman in the Columbia Journalism review posted on Dec.21,3010. The interview with Grieder is
about how the press miss report the condition and the so called “crisis” of
social security. For this
post I have taken Greider’s points and applied some of them to reporting on
school reform. I am relying upon
Greider’s extensive knowledge of the press and economics reporting and applying some of the ideas to reporting on school reform
where I see a parallel problem
No comments:
Post a Comment