Politics & Power Quote by Linda Chavez

Skepticism here isn’t a mood, it’s a job description - and Chavez frames it as the one habit that keeps journalism from collapsing into stenography. The sentence is built on a simple contrast: “digging” versus “accepting.” That verb choice matters. Digging implies labor, persistence, even mess; accepting implies comfort and compliance. She’s not romanticizing cynicism for its own sake, she’s defending an institutional reflex: distrust as a public service.

The subtext is a warning about how power launders its stories. By pairing “government” with “corporate bureaucrats,” Chavez undercuts the tribal idea that propaganda only comes from the state. “Official line” is the key phrase: it suggests a pre-packaged narrative designed for repetition, not interrogation. Journalists who abandon skepticism don’t just miss scandals; they become part of the distribution system.

Contextually, Chavez is writing out of a late-20th/early-21st century ecosystem where access journalism, PR saturation, and think-tank talking points increasingly shape what counts as “news.” Her formulation also nods to a quieter anxiety: skepticism is easy to praise, hard to fund. Newsrooms under deadline pressure and economic strain are tempted to run the press release, book the friendly spokesperson, quote the executive summary.

There’s a second, sharper edge: skepticism is being positioned as professional ethics rather than partisan posture. In an era when “bias” accusations try to discipline reporters into deference, Chavez argues the opposite - neutrality isn’t obedience. The point isn’t to disbelieve everything; it’s to refuse the shortcut of believing on authority.