Orality and Fact

This reflection essay explores two topics, orality (what is said, heard, and orally repeated) and fact. I once thought that a rare phenomenon occurred only in my small home town of Newport. I had noticed that when someone said something with authority, people would often repeat whatever was said until enough people were saying it and it was simply accepted as fact. I referred to this as Newport “truths.” What I once thought was only typical of my small town environment, I have come to recognize now in Fox news and news talk show programming.

Fox Broadcasting uses catch phrases and slogans that allow the listener to assume that these phrases are said with some authority. For instance, the slogan which heralds in Fox News coverage is entitled “Fair and Balanced.” After watching only a few of these news broadcasts or listening to the commentary made by the anchors on other Fox news talk shows, it is clear that this organization has a definite conservative edge. Balance is not part of this equation and fairness might depend on whether or not one agrees with their blatant conservative political leanings or not. (Rendall & Hollar, 2004) Fox has gained more and more listeners and has established its authority simply by implying that they know something that others do not. They offer this authority by saying, “People we’ve talked to,” or “Some people say…” to infer that if they don’t know themselves, they know people who are authorities and they are connected to them. (Greenwald, 2004) People with conservative political views serve on the Fox Board of Directors, act as news expert consultants, provide financially support for their stations through advertising revenues, and secure funding for political action groups and targeted campaigns. Conservative talk radio hosts have quoted Fox News anchors and other Fox talk show expert consultants as stating a particular position which gives legitimacy to their own position and subsequent actions. Something is said with authority, repeated by someone quoting this authority and when repeated enough times by enough people, whatever was said, becomes the “truth” and people then perceive it as “fact.”

Fox is typical of the ideology that supports the notion that “the masses” are not capable of governing and therefore must be told what to think and how to conduct their lives. Noam Chomsky, in the documentary film entitled Manufacturing Consent, (Achbar & Wintonick) talks about what Walter Lippmann described in his book Public Opinion as “the manufacture of consent.” Lippman wrote that the manufacture of consent was “a technique of control” that is useful and necessary because the “common interests (those issues that affect all people in a democracy) very largely elude the public.” So these common interests must be “managed only by a specialized class.” This, in Chomsky’s view, is the opposite of the standard view of democracy and he enlists, as support for this view, the words of moralist Reinholt Niebuhr to complete the picture of how people can be taken in by a well established “myth” and believe that they have power when it has been taken from them. Neibuhr posited that “rationality belongs to the cool observer, but because of the stupidity of the average man, he follows not reason, but faith. This naïve faith requires “necessary illusion and emotionally potent oversimplifications.” These are provided by the “myth maker to keep the ordinary person on course.” (Achbar&Wintonick, Chapter/Scene 5) These tactics seem to be used daily across all Fox news and informational programming. For a more in depth look at how Fox manipulates information and the power Fox has over its audience I would refer the reader to the film Outfoxed: Rupert Murdock’s War on Journalism.

The point I want to make here is that while we are bombarded each day with a great deal of information, we are still a society that has been, as part of its culture and its history, influenced by great political speeches and other oral commentary. Words matter. How they are delivered matters. We recall that which is memorable and said with authority or with a catchy turn of a phrase. (Ong, 1988) An example of this might be, “if it doesn’t fit, you must acquit,” from the O.J. Simpson trial or one of Fox News favorites regarding 2004 Presidential candidate John Kerry, “he’s a flip-flopper.” When these types of words and phrases are uttered with authority, repeated often, heard from several different sources if only in passing throughout the day while busily working in the kitchen making dinner for the family or while driving home listening to talk radio, we pick up on them and they have an impact on our perceptions. We repeat them to our family and friends without questioning their validity or accuracy. We get busy and we think it does not matter; after all we don’t run the country or say what gets on the news. We leave that up to people in authority. We continue to prove those who underestimate us as being right. We do give up power but that does not mean that we can not regain that power. More and more of us are finding alternatives to Fox and other main stream media. Rigorous public discourse continues on the Internet and a variety of political or news blogs that welcome public commentary. People are thinking and regardless of what Fox would have us believe, we still retain the ability to question authority and stand on the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution. This foundational document does not begin, “according to sources close to Fox” or “some people say”, it starts with the words, “We, the people.”

If the 2006 mid-term elections are any example, the people are becoming wise to the tactics used by Fox and other main-stream media and are exercising their authority at the voting booth. People moved away from the conservative agenda espoused by Fox by electing Democrats to office, taking control of both the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. They certainly were not told to do this by Fox, but with their votes, they repeatedly defeated Fox supported candidates across the country, now that is a “truth” that I hope is repeated in 2008 with one addition, the White House. I plan to keep repeating this with authority, perhaps many others will join me and we can eventually make this a fact. Power to the people once again!

REFERENCES

Achbar, M. & Wintonick, P. (Directors). (1993). Manufacturing consent [Motion Picture] Canada: Zeigeist Video

Greenwald, R. (Director). (2004). Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch’s war on journalism [Motion Picture] New York: The Disinformation Company

Ong, W. (1988). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. New York: Methuen

Rendall, S. & Hollar, J. (July/August 2004). Still failing the “Fair and Balanced” Test. Retrieved from the Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting website located at http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1187