It is a logical certainty that we face big problems created by our system of higher education that have not even been identified. Why is this a certainty?
1. Confirmation bias and a broader "myside" bias both exist. All humans are poorly equipped to notice, let alone understand, the problems they cause because when presented with the evidence we ignore it. This process is unconscious and very difficult to prevent.
2. Our national discussion is a back and forth between the media and the academy. The third part of the discussion--political leaders--are mediated by the media and the academy.
3. Therefore, the national discussion is ignoring evidence of the problems caused by our system of media and by our system of higher education.
When you point this out you get banned.
Today, Jay Rosen, professor of Journalism at NYU, sent out a tweet endorsing an article about journalism appearing in the Nation:
Here's a quotation from that article:
Two habits of mind stand out: an insistence that the press must pretend to Olympian neutrality, and a conviction that access to the powerful is good per se. These two beliefs coincide with the persistence of a journalistic professional class that was educated in elite institutions, is convinced of its place within the machinery of power, and has forgotten its blue-collar roots (which are literally invisible in most newsrooms now that printing presses have moved to distant suburban plants and computers have replaced hot lead).
This paragraph, which is part of the basic thesis of the whole article, is clearly identifying the way our journalists are all educated at a small set of elite schools as a problem. The contrast is with old fashioned hacks who in bygone days were blue collar workers writing for a blue collar audience. NYU is an elite school. In the olden days, greats like Mike Royko had only a high school education.