Thread: Media Dividing The Nation

Grumble Grumble Grumble

Originally, TV and Radio stations were subject to what was known as the 'Fairness Doctrine' where for Political and Scientific news and commentary, stations were required to provide 'air time' for presenting an opposing viewpoint... Unfortunately, this was lost as part of the general movement of deregulation of the free markets. The limitation on the number of Radio/TV stations/Newspapers a single individual/corporation could own in a single region has also been lost as a result of deregulation. So wishing that the media would be more responsible is simply blowing in the wind, simply because they no longer have to be responsible according to the law...

I agree with Len on that.

My dream through high school was to be a journalist.

I was inspired to get into the media as a career by the bias that exists... I wanted to be the exception, and be a true journalist, reporting all sides of an idea, event, topic, etc. without bias. (Needless to say I went a different route with my career) Even working the paper at college I couldn't stand the mentality of the field. Not to say all journalists are liars, but really... A lot of them fluff things up or dumb things down, and leave out facts they really should not. Or they don't investigate enough either... Which to me is simply not being honest nor doing the job right.

The media holds a lot of power over what people think... Most people listen to what the media has to say, and a lot of the time it may be quite biased... Though it's not always so blatant. Clever wording, images, etc. can be used to create bias even when there appears there isn't any.

The Media is nothing but another form of Communication. Knock it if you try, but this is just how humans are. Don't tell me you didn't think that something like this would happen with such a huge change? I mean I knew, and I think that's what counts [Pats self on back]. Telling the Media to stop, is like telling a baby to no cry.
It's "Communication" in one of it's greats forms. I have no problem with the way things are, because I knew it was going to happen. I mean secretly didn't you know. Didn't anyone know? I mean they been saying it for years. Years before I was born, and my mother, and my father. Maybe not my grandma thou; Anyway: "When you come to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on." I myself prefer to swing, but anyway. Thats what the Media is. It's swinging, and it's got nothng new to talk about. Read a history book you'll get what I am saying. [Just finish USA world History]

Originally Posted by Mr. K

Telling the Media to stop, is like telling a baby to no cry.

I agree with that, I just wish they would exercise more responsibility.

Originally Posted by beast

I agree with that, I just wish they would exercise more responsibility.

Agreed.

It's funny too, because being just a bit more responsible and doing the job the right way is not that much harder. It's not difficult to present accurate and unbiased information, and allow people to analyze it for themselves.

And the media knows very well that they influence the views of America. So many people will say, "Well, I saw on the news..." or "I read about so and so in the paper..." People trust the media to get them the facts. *sigh*

Grumble Grumble Grumble

Originally Posted by Spike'sRose

It's funny too, because being just a bit more responsible and doing the job the right way is not that much harder. It's not difficult to present accurate and unbiased information, and allow people to analyze it for themselves.

The issue isn't so much IF the news networks could provide unbiased information. The issue is WHY the news networks would provide unbiased information. Throughout the 60s, 70s, and 80s, the evening news was looked upon as a unprofitable loss leader before the Family Hour Prime Time broadcast lost. And as such, they became a 'Showcase' program for the networks. But this all changed when the news program '60 Minutes' proved that it was possible for a news program to actually make a profit for the networks. This started a trend, promoted by the deregulation of the 'Public Service' requirements, that eventually took over the industry. News programs are now looked upon not as 'Showcase' informative loss leaders, but now as profitable 'Entertainment' programs. And anything that would reduce the broadcast ratings, (such as presenting information contrary to the opinions of a niche viewing audience...) is now frowned upon...

Originally Posted by LenMiyata

Grumble Grumble Grumble

The issue isn't so much IF the news networks could provide unbiased information. The issue is WHY the news networks would provide unbiased information. Throughout the 60s, 70s, and 80s, the evening news was looked upon as a unprofitable loss leader before the Family Hour Prime Time broadcast lost. And as such, they became a 'Showcase' program for the networks. But this all changed when the news program '60 Minutes' proved that it was possible for a news program to actually make a profit for the networks. This started a trend, promoted by the deregulation of the 'Public Service' requirements, that eventually took over the industry. News programs are now looked upon not as 'Showcase' informative loss leaders, but now as profitable 'Entertainment' programs. And anything that would reduce the broadcast ratings, (such as presenting information contrary to the opinions of a niche viewing audience...) is now frowned upon...

Oh thank you for the information, Len!

I see what you mean, and I agree.

Indeed, why present accurate, unbiased information when it will cause ratings to drop? >.< It makes me sad that the value in journalism has been lost to ratings.

This isn't surprising in a way... Isn't everything about money and ratings now? (T_T)

I do find it interesting that 60 Minutes was the start of the realization of the monetary and rating value in media, actually... I didn't know that! I still actually enjoy watching 60 Minutes from time to time... >.>