Originally? Good to know. Thanks. But also not relevant in the context of the now.
"The term Fourth Estate or fourth power refers to the press and news media both in explicit capacity of advocacy and implicit ability to frame political issues.[1]"
My point is, we have "journalists" whining about "the democracy" and those same "journalists" aren't aware how badly their profession has already failed said institution / ideal.
Imagine pulling up to a fire. Tossing on buckets of flammable liquids. And then with a straight face claim to be a firefighter. It's Orwellian. The lack of self-awareness is not only embarrassing, but it's become down right dangerous.
I akshully think that the fourth estates to be more about a viable vehicle whose intent is to feel out the community and put them into actionable words back into the community.
Congress.com isn’t all that helpful if the laws are verbose and often at time seemingly obtuse.
Printing press is one such vehicle whose time may have come, unless digital realm has slips its stranglehold on this fourth estates.
Newspapers can and should recapture their market by allowing citizens, both verified and anonymously) to post their events, may that it be a house fire, stolen car, robbery, or shenanigans by politicians.
Newspapers may be able to recapture further if they provide a running tabulation of such categories.
But what do I know, the fourth estates is probably already hijacked by social media in their own bastardized manners.
Can’t believe I’m defending journalist but this analogy is only partially accurate imho.
People consume press and news media on their own volition, and even more less-vetted but newsworthy information through social media. Journalists are gassing what consumers respond to.
I believe what’s happened is that in the past, local news consumers were aware of their own “fire” (crime, civics, politics) and now in a connected world it feels like their standing amongst a great massive fire, but really they just have visibility into all of the little fires (or consternation that their local fire doesn’t seem important to anyone).
Many journalists, arguably most journalists, also see themselves as advocates; advocates for something other than journalism or speech. And this has become much more prevalent than in previous generations. Everybody is an underdog, everybody else is an abuser, and abuse can't be tolerated.
Even the concept of being able to report on an issue without becoming entangled in it has become anathema. The concept was, of course, always a fiction, but fictions matter. All morality is fictional, if not all reality. Even self-styled centrists and moderates tend to tacitly accept this new narrative; that dispassion and distance is impossible and undesirable.
Many older journalists who were keeping the flame alive crumbled during the Trump years. It was understandable, but it was sort of a one-way street; they accepted defeat and have largely embraced the new narrative.
I think we've all done this, myself included. It's one thing to recognize a pathology, but quite another to seek to address it, and yet another to actually succeed. Now we're all sort of lost in the wilderness. Even the ones who have clear memories from whence we came don't know how to get back.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Estate
Sadly, it seems even the Fourth Estate doesn't know its name and/or role. Being a parrot and/or sock puppet doesn't qualify (as journalism).