Keeping their feet to the fire

It’s the only way to handle the crazies so many are listening to

Perhaps you hadn’t heard of Alex Jones before this week. Maybe you won’t next week either, and if so, I am tempted to say thank goodness.

His growing fame was given a boost this week with news that Megyn Kelly, formerly and famously of Fox News, has interviewed Jones for an upcoming segment of her NBC show, and it has caused a ruckus in journalistic circles.

Some say Kelly shouldn’t legitimize a wacko radio show host who said “no one died” at the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., in 2012, among other crazy talk.

Then again, none other than Donald Trump gave Jones the biggest boost last year when he came on the show and said: “Your reputation is amazing. I won’t let you down.”

Jones has many fans, and many followers. It’s astounding to me, but that is the world we live in.

Some journalists say we should simply ignore such crazies. (Jones has said the moon landings were faked and believes the government was involved in the Oklahoma City bombings.)

But we cannot ignore people to whom so many others are listening. And when we do, we ignore them at our peril. While it can be dangerous to give them credence through coverage, it can be disastrous to pretend they don’t exist.

On the other hand, journalists could do a better job of holding their feet to the fire.

We didn’t ignore Joseph McCarthy, but too many did not stand up to him, either. We didn’t ignore Hitler, but too many did not recognize the monster he was.

That kind of recognition comes eventually, but the media must play a bigger role in exposing such beasts.

Kelly’s interview with Jones should shine light on a dark space, but it must also hold him to account. If it doesn’t, it’s just entertainment, not journalism, a charge increasingly levelled at many “news” organizations these days, especially in the era of Trump.

At The Hamilton Spectator, we are often accused of giving space or attention to those with questionable facts and opinions. Choose your topic: LRT, vaccinations, fluoride in water, one-way streets, climate change ...

So do we ignore it or banish it? Or expose it, allowing readers and writers to question it, scrutinize it, debunk it? The truth is we do banish some nutty writers, and ignore speakers who are “out there.”

Maybe it’s too many; maybe not enough.

The challenge for a news organization such as The Spectator is to provide reliable, trustworthy, balanced news and information, but encourage debate by reflecting as many views as possible.

It is both a strength and a weakness in a media world increasingly guided by entertainment and money, playing only one note and polarized by the likes of Alex Jones.