The most dangerous "–ism"

I’ve always been skeptical of –isms. Communism, capitalism, and totalitarianism – they’re big, they’re threatening and they affect our daily lives. But what I’ve come to realize is that there is one –ism that is more treacherous than the others combined: journalism.\nJournalism is the –ism that’s supposed to protect us from all the other ones. It’s the gatekeeper of democracy, but when the gate is not kept we are left with precarious situations. The –ism failed to do its job in the time leading up to the Iraq War. Whether you are for or against the War on Terror, it is undeniable that journalism failed us in its role in democracy. \nReporters like Judith Miller and Michael Gordon of the New York Times wrote false stories about Saddam Hussein’s “quest for a-bomb parts.” Journalism proved to be a dangerous, and for thousands of people, a deadly –ism. It’s understandable why 53 percent of people think the media’s stories are inaccurate and 36 percent feel it hurts democracy, according to journalism.org. \nNow, in one of the most crucial elections our country has seen in decades, this –ism is once again demonstrating how dangerous it can be. It’s distracting from the issues and is instead focusing on trivial squabbles. It also doesn’t help that the definition of what is considered journalism is expanding to include bloggers.\nBloggers with no accountability can spread falsities with little to no consequences. I received an email the other day with a link to a blog that tried to negatively portray Barack Obama as a Muslim. People believe this. This person once believed it. In fact, 15 percent of voters believe Obama is a Muslim, according to politico.com.\nBut the worst part is that the national media also seems to spread lies. \nIn February, the New York Times published an article citing anonymous sources that accused John McCain of having an affair. It was not based on hard facts, which is supposed to be a foundation of journalism. It was full of half-truths. \nAnd who could forget the New Hampshire Democratic debate presented by ABC? The nation saw Charlie Gibson focus on flag pins rather than social security. While he didn’t say anything fictitious, he did neglect to concentrate on what really matters. If journalism does not hold politicians, and the –isms they want to attain power in accountable, it creates a dangerous situation for the people who rely on it to act as a gatekeeper. \nJournalism can lie to your face in the name of truth, and the masses are likely to lap it up. The foundation of democracy, of the United States of America, is journalism. If it can’t be trusted, and if it is only concerned about its profit, ratings, and subscribers, what hope does our society have from being taken advantage of by the other -isms?