Sharon Kennedy: Pink slime journalism

In case you’re unaware, “pink slime” refers to animal gristle that is ground up, gets a dose of red food coloring and is sold as meat or a meat additive. That’s not a very appetizing picture to conjure as you’re enjoying sausage and eggs this morning, but it’s the truth until proven otherwise. However, leaving the meat market and heading into the print arena, “pink slime journalism” is a means of persuading voters to believe anything no matter how ridiculous. Reputable news outlets like Gannett Media are not part of this industry. Metric Media is.

During a general election year, pink slime journalism pops up overnight like a yard full of dandelions. It’s not just questionable papers that print misleading right-wing propaganda. It’s also websites funded by the mega-rich that fool citizens into believing what is basically a grift to get their dollars and their vote. Do left-wing billionaires do the same thing? I’ll leave that for someone else to discover. My focus is on the sheets that print stuff guaranteed to scare the electorate and secure their vote by printing grossly exaggerated articles or outright lies.

In doing a little research, I came across Columbia University’s Tow Center for Digital Journalism's 175-page report on “Pink Slime Partisan Journalism and the Future of Local News.” In brief, “Our report distinguishes pink slime journalism from partisan journalism. We use this label to apply to digital or print content that mimics the appearance of local news, but whose primary contribution is partisan content or the laundering of reputations that lacks transparency regarding intent, authorship, ownership and funding, and that often relies on content generated by algorithms. There is often a strong element of "astro-turf" activity where reporters and editors are based outside the geographies they write about, and their assignments are centralized.” Big deal, you say. How does that affect me?

According to unnamed sources, the daily newspaper that used to appear in every city and small town across America started disappearing 40 years ago. When it left, a lot of factual information went with it. Things really went south in the 1980s when Ronnie Reagan decided there was no need to enforce antitrust laws. This decision was good news for monopolies. Ten years later, Bill Clinton finished the job by declaring there would no longer be any ownership limits for news outlets. Since 2005 the U.S. has lost one-quarter of all its newspapers. In many communities that means relying on a mixture of social media and informal communication. That’s how the lack of a responsible local paper affects you.

Pink slime “newspapers” write stories guaranteed to frighten people. ClickOnDetroit reported, “Ahead of the 2020 election, outlets masquerading as credible local news websites increased throughout our country, and Michigan was no exception.” Who cares, you ask. There’s no indication the same thing is happening in my town.

You might be right, but you could be wrong. If you listen to DJT’s speeches, you’ll often see a disclaimer at the bottom of the screen. It says something like, “Not everything you hear is factual.” In other words, the man who wants a second whack at being president, is a liar. The concept of “free speech” allows him to lie as much as he desires and get away with it. His crowd is so ginned up, they don’t even hear what he’s saying. They’re simply thrilled to be in his presence. Couple these televised lies with an inaccurate printed word that lands in your mailbox, and you have an example of unbridled pink slime journalism leaving you bewitched, bewildered and besotted with a criminal.

— To contact Sharon Kennedy, send her an email at sharonkennedy1947@gmail.com. Kennedy's new book, "View from the SideRoad: A Collection of Upper Peninsula Stories," is available from her or Amazon.

This article originally appeared on The Holland Sentinel: Sharon Kennedy: Pink slime journalism