The media fail to separate fact from fiction, undermining democracy and an informed citizenry.

Now that the elections are over and the winners and losers decided, it is worth thinking more calmly about the American political process. I teach about the history of Europe over the past 200 years. In those two centuries, monarchies have given way to democracies, civil rights have been enshrined in constitutions and representative government has triumphed over dictatorships.

These changes are symbolized by elections, the most important act of free citizens in free countries. So why are American elections such unpleasant occasions that we are relieved when they are over?

This year’s election in Maine was especially marred by the arguments over Question 1, the extension of protection against discrimination to our homosexual citizens. I would not dignify the name-calling, scare tactics and personal nastiness around Question 1 with the word “debate.”

The real issues were barely touched: How much discrimination do gays suffer in Maine? Is there a difference between protecting Jews or African-Americans from discrimination and protecting homosexuals?

While Mainers, and Texans, were attacking each other over gay rights, other Americans used the electoral process to carry out vicious fights over abortion, evolution and the death penalty. Attack ads turned our television sets into weapons for maligning other Americans, putting forth one-sided and mostly misleading diatribes masquerading as information.

The one fact that convinces me that our entire political process no longer serves us American citizens is the constant claim by political loudmouths on the right that “liberals hate America,” or that “liberals are traitors.”

This stupid idea has made Ann Coulter rich and famous, and a media darling, and is repeated daily by others who have used this lie to gain fame and fortune on radio and TV. I find it ironic that these conservatives constantly demonstrate their own hatred for half of the American electorate, and then say that liberals hate America.

Political hate speech poisons our political system, divides Americans and distracts us from the real problems that we face: continuing poverty, a crumbling infrastructure, unemployment, a war that our government is afraid to admit is unwinnable.

I think that two fundamental problems threaten to spoil American democracy, once a model for the rest of the world.

The first is the increasing intrusion of religion into politics. Those who oppose equal treatment for gays cite Biblical quotations as arguments for legislation. People whose religious beliefs are contradicted by the scientific consensus about evolution propose that public schools teach a version of natural history whose only support is the Bible. Of course, it is impossible to separate religious belief from political behavior, since the ethical values which inform political choices are often based on religious teachings. But the founders of the American republic tried to prevent religion from being made into law, and we should maintain that level of separation.

The second problem is the abdication by the press and other media of their job of informing us about political issues. Instead of providing the public with the factual information we need to make good decisions, the media now present everything as someone’s opinion, which is then opposed by the contrary opinion of the other side. Thus experiences of gays with discrimination in Maine were typically represented as the opinion of those who promoted the anti-discrimination act. That allowed the opinion of the gay-rights opponents that there is no discrimination to appear to have equal weight.

In discussions of evolution, when biologists say that evolution is universally supported by the scientific community, that is represented by the media as their partisan opinion.

Rather than openly reporting what the facts are, the media turn everything into partisan opinion. In March, C-SPAN caused a scandal by trying to “balance” a talk by a Holocaust scholar with a speech by a Holocaust denier. A C-SPAN executive said, “You know how important fairness and balance is at C-SPAN … We work very, very hard at this. We ask ourselves, Is there an opposing view of this?'”

Of course, there is an opposing opinion to everything. But we expect our media to distinguish fact from opinion, to do the research and report the facts. By abandoning reporting in favor of the excitement of warring opinions, the media help to inflame political debate. Religious belief is given the same weight as fact, and the public is left to choose between rival attack ads.

Our laws should not enshrine any particular religious beliefs, just as our government should not promote any particular religion. If our political system could separate religion from politics, and our media fact from opinion, then elections could once again become the exercise in civic responsibility that our founders intended.

Steve Hochstadt teaches history at Bates College. He can be reached by e-mail at: [email protected].