Is the mass media a propagnda tool to mold us? Or is it just where too weak to look away or that we just need to ration how much media we use. Or is it that the laws we have are (reference to American laws) fine just not enforced, I don't know. Maybe we need to change the news stations, or can we not cange anything and just have to teach are selfs what the news wont, critical pedagogy, if you will. Note I'm just like to get some people's ideas on the topic and possiable alterinatives.
Stay tuned to the alternative media on the internet. A much broader range of information. Mass media is not too much different than soap operas. Whatever sells, drama is the biggest thing going. Mass media is mostly a mouthpiece for whatever "they" want you to know. For example, the BEST presidential candidates are currently IGNORED by the mainstream media to the point where lots of folks have never even heard of some of them. It's a popularity contest. In smaller focus on a local level, many times information for "news" stories which involve the police, is provided by, you guessed it, the police. Those kinds of stories are one sided at best. The motto would be to research anything you might be interested in from many different angles and DO NOT BELIEVE something just because a major news network says so...
The mainstream media is a propaganda tool in the least. The fourth branch of the government if you will. I'm speaking of experience in the US, CA, and the UK but i'm sure it's quite similiar in most of the "developed" world. Mainstream media and entertainment are used as a conditioning tool to control people. The price of liberty is eternal vigilance, what better way to usurp liberty than to systematically alter perceptions of reality and replace what would be widespread dissent with a scripted response?
Obviously in some countries state owned ''mass media'' is a mouth piece for the goverment - that tends to be the major source of information for the ''masses''. This is not the case in the UK or US. There the ''mass media'' do a good job - and on the other hand a bad job. You can read or listen to any bias you like - morning noon and night. Ofcourse the media is biased and is used as a propoganda tool - but that is for monetary and comercial gain - It ''sells'' what the people wish to ''buy'' into. The major ''mass media'' news in the UK comes from the BBC ITN or AP wich i'm sure pools the information between themselves as well. That is vary detailed with not much bias - but then it is spun by those that are repeating it for their audience. I do think the majority of the news spouted out for the majority - is just regurgitated opinion and a simplified version of events with the majority of the ''truth'' ommited. In other words ''dumbed down''. Though to be fair it is that way because the majority of us find it eaiser to digest and like to hear our prejudices being borne out and ''proven''. The BBC for e.g are poor at providing good quality news on their major stations - when the majority of people will be listening/watching - but have some excellent coverage on their digital stations/websites when not many people are watching or listening or are not likely to go and look at the information. WHY ? i guess it is easier to pick up a newspaper and parrot the headlines. That is what people are talking about and that is what the majority of people are interested in. Does it not feed on who has more money to promote themselves ?. Who is likely to win etc - Not to be to cynical - i'm sure on the affiliated news stations - vast amounts of coverage is given to the BEST candidates [who ever you say they are ?].. Not many people [out side leicester] are interested in who is running in the local elections in Leicester - but it is reported on the supposed horrid ''mass media'' http://www.bbc.co.uk/leicester/cont...ection_debate_2007_regeneration_feature.shtml I think you need a individual shovel and find the time to dig. Be that looking more closely at what the ''mass media'' are reporting or what the 'independant' media is supposedly highlighting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ofcom#See_also They can have a opinion wich the majority of the news tends to be these days - as long as it is not libelous - they tend to get away with it.
Hundreds of them - to be fair they also have some kind of ethical policys - but like i say it tends to be a LOT of a media organisations POV and comment - most of the factual element is correct - just the opinion/interpretation can be a load of b*******s Interesting websites http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/arch...com.org.uk/static/archive/bsc/plain/index.htm http://www.spj.org/ethics.asp
There is nothing inherently wrong with it. The fault lies with too much concentration of ownership and what holds people's interests.
mass media is a brain washing tool made by people who THINK they know what should be worn, how we should speak and what we should think, i dont care for mass media
I definitely think the Media molds us as human beings. From the time were born were fed all this garbage and propaganda which is so hidden in text but we still pick it up. It goes much deeper then just the news station, but to radio, internet, public areas....it's all controlled to mold us into perfect mindless blobs.
ZAdria, there is always a difference between a code of ethics (like SPJ's) and what teh editors do with a piece. here is the Society of Professional Journalists' code: http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp now, not every reporter is in SPJ. There are literally hundreds of professional organizations (I've been in three), and codes are basically unenforcible. A reporter who disregards them will get a reputation and find it difficult to land that next job, so there is a bit of karma involved. Do I know of editors who direct coverage in a way inconsistent with fair coverage? yes. I worked for one. I almost lost my job for doing it right (involved a bank which was an advertiser and loan holder on the building). I'm not there anymore. Where I am, I have LOTS of leeway to find stories, and some ARE going to be slanted. No one wants a pedophile, a twice convicted one at that, in their neighborhood, and when neighbors make a stink, that gets ink. But I also interviewed the pervert, and found a LOT of what the neighbors were saying did not pan out when you looked at court records and talked to the guy. if you read columns and editorial pages and then complain that all news is slanted purposefully, then you need to read NEWS. I barely consider broadcast TV and radio news, btw. Print snobbery, perhaps, but .... (shrug)
