A lot has changed in how we conduct our national, state and local politics. Our political discussions are increasingly marked by acrimony and finger pointing. The lack of trust and respect seems far worse than any other time in recent memory. It’s not that the issues today stress us more than those in the past. In the 1960s and 70s we dealt with the assassinations of JFK, RFK, Dr. King, the civil rights movement, riots in our cities, the Vietnam war — where 55,000 Americans died — and Watergate. Incidents and events that tested us to the core. But we got through them and remained whole.
We did so because there was a basic trust between the public and officialdom, based on the means of national communications. The three major broadcast networks, the public’s principal source of news, had earned a high measure of trust with their viewers. The public could count on all three agreeing on the basic facts regarding a major issue. Reasons explaining why an event unfolded as it did would be debated, but the facts regarding the event were seldom, if ever, in dispute. That is not true today. Basic facts, like who invaded whom to start the Russian-Ukraine war are ignored or denied. It’s hard to find a consensus approach when we have distinctly contradictory realities.
Broadcast television’s role as our national referee was compromised with the spread of the cable networks, talk radio and then shattered by online social media.
Our cities and towns had thriving regional, city and community newspapers that served as the watchdogs over state and local government. Then the internet began to savage the financial sustainability of papers big and small. Direct electronic advertising via social media and the internet resulted in the erosion of newspaper advertising revenue. Remember perusing the want ads and special sales editions in the local papers? Not too much of that happens now. Readers have multiple alternatives. In Stanislaus County, our major regional paper, the Modesto Bee once had circulation on Sundays that approached 100,000. Not anymore.
As newspaper readership declined, the ability to hold elected officials accountable also receded. In political campaigns direct mail has long been a useful tool for candidates. That is still the case, as the sophistication of mail targeting is now exceptional. Candidates and their consultants can order voter lists based on the voters age, partisan registration, ethnicity, voting propensity, and gender and then refine the list by filtering it with other info that further defines voter inclinations (subscribers of various special interest publications or newsletters).
In the past, an active and lively press would turn on any candidate who overtly lied or misled voters. But it’s hard to do that when the paper doesn’t have the reach, staff or resources to detail such behavior in a timely fashion. The chance of exposing the lie disappears when there is no credible fact checker.
Who is going to be our umpires in our upcoming elections?
Social media offers hope but also dread. It is inexpensive as campaign tools go. It is quick. Turnaround time and outreach can start with a phone call and a check. But both sides in the campaign have the exact same opportunity to share their message. Social media can clear the air of falsehoods in a campaign, but it can also be the vehicle to spread those falsehoods.
Voters are smarter than many consultants and candidates think. They have unique abilities to sniff out phonies. That will be very important this year. The elections in June and November this year will be hard fought and most likely feature much of the worst in our politics. But voters will make the final call.
It is up to us. Hear the candidates. Check their statements. Are their promises realistic? Are their solutions sound? The internet is a wonderful tool. Discover ChatGPT. But be wary. Find folks you trust and listen to them. Ask questions. Reject those candidates who dismiss reality in favor of sound bites. If someone ignores basic facts because of partisanship or politics, it is likely that person will not be a good leader or decision maker.
If a candidate’s campaign consists simply of finger pointing and blaming others demand more. It may be true that it is time for a change. But that change should be a step forward, not a step back.
In 2026, we are the umpires.
