There are the politicians – depressing, I know. There are “the people” – that movable feast that includes the lost souls in retail parks who “don’t trust any of them” and the passionate public sector workers who occasionally break through in phone-ins or Question Time to talk expertly of their experience. Then there are the journalists, apparently as untrustworthy as the politicians, dictated to by our evil overlords. Add to this bonfire of the vanities the spark of social media, where everyone lives in their own cocoon of self-righteousness, cancelling, blocking, or piling in on someone who must be evil since they vote differently.

It often seems as if this election is happening elsewhere. I did get a leaflet but, outside of the media, I don’t hear much talk about what everyone knows is so important. The disconnect between knowing about the election and feeling it is what interests me.

Johnson is a joke – the unfunniest joke ever. I don’t need films to tell me about child hunger. I have gone on enough school trips and, sure, I see Labour has a radical programme, but shilly-shallying around antisemitism is not radical. Maybe the fervour will hit me, but I wonder at my own profession’s failure to reflect the reality of what is happening. What happened to being less London-centric? What happened to listening?

We are now post-truth, post-integrity and post-politics in a sense. A manifesto of wishful thinking versus a nonsensical slogan. Trust has evaporated because what is on offer is fantasy.

The old journalistic codes are no longer viable. Speed versus veracity? Speed wins. Accountability? From who to whom? Protection of sources? Come on! Audience engagement is low because younger people are not getting their news from “trusted sources”. The BBC’s famous impartiality is not fit for purpose.

None of this should surprise us. We have already seen the media bow and scrape before Trump, parsing his word salads as sentences, acquiescing to his tantrums in return for access. We now have the UK’s prime minister avoiding a tough interview, and debates with various mediocrities. Facts and stats are reeled off, but no one is properly challenged. Listen to Joe Rogan getting stoned with his guests on YouTube if you want that kind of truth. Accountability is to be achieved not by empty-chairing people but by much more relaxed interviews. Slow it all down: the need for speed is satisfied by the Twitter stories that implode within an hour or so. The confrontational approach of interviews, where media-trained politicians lie to well-informed presenters, backfires. Everyone is worried about division and polarisation while feeding these beasts raw meat.

There is little attempt to persuade voters to change lifelong voting patterns, even though this is what the main parties need. Corbyn likes to be among those who already love him. Johnson bowls up at a hospital where polite medics barely hide their contempt. Why are journalists reporting these tired stunts?

Are press conferences useful? No. The lobby system is corrupt and always has been. Journalists should stop using unnamed sources. Above all, they should treat the people as if they know what is happening – because they do.

The Marxist notion of false consciousness is detrimental, as warrior/activists believe that only if some smart person (them) explains to ordinary folk the true economic situation, will the scales fall from their eyes and their enslavement to capitalism end. Show me the evidence for this, please.

In reality, the media has lost trust in the people. People are complicated and contradictory – the changing view on immigration is an example of this. Simplification may be the job of the politician, but it is not that of the journalist.

The media loses if it cannot engage “the people”, and the people think we are one and the same as the political class. Too often this is true, I am afraid.

As the French theorist Guy Debord put it: “The spectacle presents itself as a vast inaccessible reality that can never be questioned. Its sole message is: ‘What appears is good; what is good appears.’”

This is the passivity that both the spectacle and the media demand. But the people are no longer mesmerised. Pass the remote. They want to see something else.