“He looks small. He just looks like a small man.” — CNN’s Dana Bash, January 20, 2021

“He’s leaving town as an autocrat, ousted from power, heading to exile.” — CNN’s White House Correspondent Jim Acosta, January 20, 2021

“The leadership of Facebook is pathetic. Sheryl Sandberg, Mark Zuckerberg, you are pathetic. You need to be shut down. You have destroyed this country.” — MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski on “Morning Joe”

“How are we going to deprogram these people, who signed up for the Cult of Trump?” — CBS Morning News’ Katie Couric

How are we going to “deprogram” 74 million people, Katie?

Almost DailyBrett must stop and ask: Who elected Mizz Couric to decide whether millions of people, who don’t agree with her arrogant points of view, need to be sent to re-education camps? The thought of places where “deprogramming” is carried out conveys a chilling image to your author.

Have we reached the point that tribal news network pundits can label with impunity the outgoing president as small, compare him to an exiled dictator, conclude the planet’s largest free communication platform is destroying the nation, and call for deprogramming people who had the audacity to vote another way?

Didn’t a certain entitled politician in 2016 describe these very same Trump voters as needing to be placed in a “basket of deplorables?” Didn’t she suffer at the ballot box for her regrettable intemperate remarks? One can argue how big or how small the penalty that Hillary ultimately paid, but childish arrogant insults and name calling are childish arrogant insults and name calling.

Hillary had to answer to the voters. Do these arrogant network talking heads have any accountability? Do they have bosses?

Just because one works for a major network with 24-7-365 security, do these privileged polemics really believe they can just resort to name calling and make insensitive remarks without any professional responsibility? Try lobbing similar insults in a crowded bar.

Judgmental name calling, pontification and bloviation may be good for Nielsen Ratings and advertising dollars, but don’t they also further divide the nation?

According to qualitative researcher Frank Luntz, 97 percent of MSNBC regular viewers voted for Joe Biden last November, 96 percent of CNN watchers also cast their votes for Biden, while 93 percent of Fox News aficionados sided with Donald Trump.

Are Dana Bash, Jim Acosta, Mika Brzezinski, Katie Couric and unfortunately many others informing the nation or just affirming previously held thoughts and positions?

American Media Hits Rock Bottom

If America’s Media was a publicly traded stock, it would have been sold years ago as the trend is downward to the right.

Gallup last year reported that Americans trust in its media has declined steadily from 72 percent approval in 1976 to 40 percent last year, a cumulative 44 percent decrease.

The 2021 Edelman Trust Barometer just this month reported that all sources of information around the world reached a record low with traditional media declining from 61 percent to 53 percent in just one year, an election year in America.

The numbers are stark, empirical and indisputable from independent organizations (i.e., pollster Gallup, international PR firm Edelman). The lack of esteem for the arrogant American Media Industrial Complex (AMIC) is at a critical point in history.

Do we need our university journalism and communications schools to teach future network polemics to provide arrogant sanctimonious interpretation (e.g., Couric) to grateful partisans?

Or should our university journalism and communication schools prepare future journalists in objectively and professionally covering, reporting and presenting news, information and facts that do not merely affirm previously held positions, but actually help educate our society regardless of how the political chips may fall?

And if necessary let’s deprogram the faculties at these journalism and communication schools to produce professional journalists not political activist polemics.

Thank you for the idea, Katie.