The darkness that democracy dies in is here

The darkness that democracy dies in is here.

Some might call that hyperbolic, but as a practitioner, scholar, and close observer of journalism for more than 25 years, I’ve lost faith that well-meaning criticism of journalists who engage in horse-race coverage, false equivalence, and lazy, narrow ways of defining objectivity will make any meaningful difference. The excellent reporting many prominent outlets did about the candidates and their policies didn’t break through to the many voters who either prefer to live in the alternative-facts universe of right-wing media or were turned off by the absurd sanewashing of Trump and his allies. This election was decided in no small part by voters who believed a number of false things about the candidates and the country. The Fourth Estate has failed.

The only way forward for journalism in 2025 is to prioritize mutual aid and collaboration with people in other fields who have expertise in listening, organizing, and, most importantly, belonging. Unless and until we’re able to bring people together at the local level and start new conversations about how we govern ourselves and build the social capital essential for healthy communities, little will change.

Of course, this isn’t a new idea. I and many other engagement journalism practitioners have argued for years that journalists can only address their ongoing crisis of trust by listening to and building relationships with the people we serve. These efforts have not been in vain; University of Wisconsin journalism professor Sue Robinson has documented the impacts of no less than 30 journalism initiatives that promote engaged journalism practices to build trust. Her extensive research on these efforts led her to describe it as a paradigm shift to a more participatory form of journalism. The alumni from the master’s program in engagement journalism I founded and led for ten years at the Newmark Graduate School of Journalism at CUNY before coming to Montclair State this fall continue to do meaningful work, as do many others. But it is not enough.

Solidarity journalism, which argues that journalists “must stand for basic human dignity and against suffering” by framing stories in ways that “center the lived experiences of people subjected to unjust conditions,” and movement journalism, which is focused on “collaboration between journalists and grassroots movements, and supporting journalism created by oppressed and marginalized people,” have already developed frameworks and practices we need. It is time for more of us to practice — and even more importantly — fight for these approaches.

Journalism schools need to find more ways to collaborate across disciplines in 2025 to expand the skill set journalism students learn beyond reporting and storytelling, and get students in other majors to think critically with us about information, how it is produced and distributed, and the role that it plays in advancing different social goals and building community.

The Jersey Bee, founded and led by one of my former students, Simon Galperin, prioritizes events that connect people locally and facilitate discussion, shared understanding and collective problem solving, as well as explainer journalism that can help people with solve concrete, basic problems in their life, like how to access reproductive health care, apply for SNAP benefits, or run for mayor. It is unapologetically committed not to reflexive neutrality but to improving the quality of life for everyone in the community, particularly those with fewer resources. If we really care about bringing healthy democracy back, this is the way.

The hundreds of journalists Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel surveyed for their book Elements of Journalism once agreed that their fundamental purpose was to “give people the information they need to be free and govern themselves.” Those that still believe in this purpose must be committed to a journalism that is not just about informing, but also about belonging.