Ideas die at the hands of journalists. This is the controversial thesis offered by Michael McDevitt in a sweeping examination of anti-intellectualism in American journalism. A murky presence, anti-intellectualism is not acknowledged by reporters and editors. It is not easily measured by scholars, as it entails opportunities not taken, context not provided, ideas not examined. Where Ideas Go to Die will be the first book to document how journalism polices
intellect at a time when thoughtful examination of our society's news media is arguably more important than ever.
Through analysis of media encounters with dissent since 9/11, McDevitt argues that journalism engages in a form of social control, routinely suppressing ideas that might offend audiences. McDevitt is not arguing that journalists are consciously or purposely controlling ideas, but rather that resentment of intellectuals and suspicion of intellect are latent in journalism and that such sentiment manifests in the stories journalists choose to tell, or not to tell. In their commodification of
knowledge, journalists will, for example, "clarify" ideas to distill deviance; dismiss nuance as untranslatable; and funnel productive ideas into static, partisan binaries. Anti-intellectualism is not unique to American media. Yet, McDevitt argues that it is intertwined with the nation's cultural history,
and consequently baked into the professional training that occurs in classrooms and newsrooms. He offers both a critique of our nation's media system and a way forward, to a media landscape in which journalists recognize the prevalence of anti-intellectualism and take steps to avoid it, and in which journalism is considered an intellectual profession.
Industry Reviews
"One of the book's chief strengths is the way its substantive chapters take a multimodal approach to interrogating how anti-intellectualism manifests in journalistic text, practice, and education. ... One leaves this book with a deeper understanding of how an obligation to preserving enduring normative standards can leave practitioners, educators, and advocates alike blind to all the ways journalism's institutional arrangements are built on a compromise with
more unsavory realities." -- Mass Communication and Society
"In this provocative and timely book, McDevitt guides us through the many ways that journalism is not a neutral conduit but an active shaper of what ideas make it into the public arena. There are no conspiracy theories here. Instead, we see how journalistic ideologies and practices converge to constrain what can be thought at any time." -- Matt Carlson, University of Minnesota
"McDevitt offers an insightful and provocative study of the anti-intellectualism that characterizes so much of mainstream journalism in the United States. Not an indictment of journalists but a critique of journalism, McDevitt focuses on taken-for granted newsroom norms and the consequences of their ideological underpinnings. This book adds a new and important chapter to the history of the culture of modern American journalism." -- Theodore L. Glasser, Stanford
University
"This book is an eye-opener. If you've thought of journalism as being a knowledge profession, this book will lead you to think again. McDevitt systematically unveils the anti-intellect strain that cuts through American journalism and journalism education. Readable and illuminating, the book is a must read for everyone in the journalism field, and for those who care about the quality of the information on which our democracy depends." -- Thomas E. Patterson,
Harvard University
"McDevitt provides a fresh and timely perspective on journalism's current predicament, arguing that the press must free itself from the forces of anti-intellectualism if it is to resist the post-truth illiberal assault. The populist wave attacks elite-based expertise, but being historically dubious of expertise has left journalism ill-equipped to push back. Without its own intellectual autonomy, the press risks both catering to a public running on emotion or
passively accommodating the currupting power of special interests." -- Stephen D. Reese, University of Texas at Austin
"a welcome critique of the behind-the-scenes of journalistic practice, rhetoric, and control" -- Robert E. Gutsche, Jr., Lancaster University, Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly
