This past week gave me pause.
Not because of a political policy debate. Not because of a campaign announcement. Not because of a headline designed to provoke outrage.
Instead, I found myself thinking about two institutions that have long represented something increasingly difficult to find in America: trusted journalism. As a former, recovering journalist, this week’s news about two of most respected news outlets gave me heartburn about two critially important news programs, Meet the Press and 60 Minutes.
On Sunday, viewers watched President Donald Trump abruptly end an interview with NBC’s Meet the Press after a tense exchange with host Kristen Welker. Whether one agreed with the questions, the answers, or the outcome, the moment underscored something important: journalism’s role is to ask difficult questions, especially of those in power.
Only days earlier, the journalism world was shaken by the firing of longtime 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley (and several producers and correspondences) amid ongoing turmoil at CBS News and questions about the future direction of one of the most respected investigative news programs in American history.
Taken separately, these are significant media stories.
Taken together, they raise a larger concern.
Are we witnessing the slow erosion of the very journalism institutions that have helped Americans understand complicated issues for generations?
As someone who has spent a career in public relations, reputation management, crisis communications, and media relations, I have worked with journalists from every political perspective imaginable. I have advised organizations that loved the coverage they received and organizations that strongly disagreed with it.
But I’ve always believed that strong journalism serves a vital purpose.
Journalists are not supposed to make everyone comfortable.
They are supposed to ask the questions people want answered.
They are supposed to challenge assumptions.
They are supposed to investigate facts, verify information, and present findings in a way that allows the public to make informed decisions.
Programs such as Meet the Press and 60 Minutes have earned their reputations over decades. Not because they were perfect, but because they consistently pursued accountability, investigation, and rigorous reporting.
That is becoming increasingly rare.
Today, journalism faces pressure from every direction.
Political leaders attack reporters.
Corporate owners face competing business interests.
Social media rewards outrage and sensationalism over accuracy.
Artificial intelligence amplifies misinformation at unprecedented speed.
And public trust continues to fragment into ideological camps where many people consume only the information that confirms what they already believe. Who do we trust now?
The result is a dangerous cycle.
When journalists ask hard questions, they are accused of bias.
When investigative reporting uncovers uncomfortable facts, motives are questioned.
When news organizations make mistakes…as all institutions occasionally do…the errors are used to discredit the entire profession.
Meanwhile, the resources required for serious investigative journalism continue to shrink.
Quality reporting is expensive.
Research is expensive.
Fact-checking is expensive.
Foreign bureaus are expensive.
Investigative teams are expensive.
Yet these are the very functions that separate journalism from opinion, speculation, and social media commentary.
My concern is not about one president, one political party, one network, or one correspondent.
My concern is about the future.
If the current environment continues, who will be left to do the difficult work?
Who will spend months investigating corruption?
Who will challenge powerful institutions?
Who will conduct the interviews that public officials may not want to answer?
Who will ask the questions that citizens deserve to hear?
Democracy requires informed citizens.
Informed citizens require credible information.
And credible information requires journalists who are empowered, and not discouraged, to pursue the truth wherever it leads.
At ReputationUs, we often talk about reputation as an asset.
The reputation of journalism may be one of America’s most important assets.
Once trust is lost, rebuilding it is extraordinarily difficult.
That is why I find this moment concerning.
The issue is not whether every story is perfect or every journalist gets it right. The issue is whether our society continues to value the institutions and practices that seek truth through verification, investigation, and accountability.
The events surrounding Meet the Press and 60 Minutes this past week suggest that the future of high-integrity journalism may be entering a more challenging chapter. That should concern all of us, regardless of political affiliation.
Because when trusted journalism disappears, it is not replaced by better journalism.
It is replaced by speculation.
It is replaced by algorithms.
It is replaced by rumor.
It is replaced by noise.
America does not need fewer journalists asking hard questions.
It needs more.
And it certainly needs more programs willing to do the difficult, often unpopular work of pursuing facts, demanding answers, and helping the public understand a complicated world.
The reputation of journalism is worth protecting.
Because ultimately, the reputation of our democracy depends on it.
