tsurara

How much has the media been compromised by private interests? Government interests? Is the news really ALL the news? Is it even true at all? Is the way it's presented designed to instill a certain belief system or ideology in those who watch it?

Recently there have been quite a few debates about the fairness of the news media, particularly in the United States, communist Asia and the Middle East. The "terrorist" organization Hamas owns it's own network and uses it to broadcast everything from anti-Jewish messages to video of children in suicide bombing gear. Al Jazeera has been accused for years of skewing the news against the United States and the West in general. North Korean television broadcasts NOTHING that isn't sanctioned, funded and supportive of Kim Jung Il's government. China has recently banned anime and foreign cartoons from some networks in hopes of fostering China's own animation industry and preventing the spread of "dangerous" pro-western ideas...

But that's the REST of the world! Right? It's not us!

Enter Fox News... Rupert Murdoch's right-wing news network brainchild. With the slogan: "Fair and Balanced", there have been accusations across the board that Fox News is nothing but a mouthpiece for pro-government, ultra-conservative propaganda.

Meanwhile, in response, fingers are pointing at CNN and networks like Comedy Central for pushing what is percieved to be an unfair pro-liberal bias. And with Fox shaping up to be the conservative network of choice: I think CNN really HAS taken a turn to cater to the remaining audience.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that between the cat-fighting libs and conservatives, the CONSTANT polarized political coverage and the 24-7 repetition of "big" buzz stories on both sides (OJ, the Clinton sex scandal, abu grahib, school shootings, 9-11, anthrax, Elizabeth Smart): there's a lot happening in the world that we AREN'T hearing about -- because it doesn't directly support one side or the other and/or wouldn't boost ratings.

Is this what the news is for? Are this huge media conglomerates getting rich on telling us what special interests want us to hear?
Are we being lied to? Are we being manipulated?
How can we fix it?

__________________

aceman67

I agree whole heartidly with you Tsu, as an outsider to the United States, I have noticed something else that you didn't mention: the prevalence of stories that, how ever unintentional/intentional it may be, provokes fear in the masses.

Anything for a story I guess.

I'm just glad that Canada doesn't have this kind of problem, we only really have two national news broadcasts: Global News, and CTV National News (And its 24hr Headline News channel counterpart), and the only difference between the two is whether or not you like the Anchors.

__________________

Joe Mage

I agree. Fox News caters ta pro-government conservatives too much and CNN caters ta the liberals. It's gotten ta where the networks only care 'bout the ratings instead of reportin' the news, but whether u believe it's unfortunate or not; that's what happens in a free society. The only way that this problem could b adressed is if our society stops contributin' ta the ratings of those networks (somethin', of which, would b quite difficult ta do) and/or demand that the networks start givin' fair and unbias reports (in which they probably wouldn' listen). So this situation is very precarious and doesn' leave much of a selection on the table. The only answer I can think of is for some1 ta create a network that is completely unbias in its reportin'. And if that network gets enough ratings, that would put the other networks on their toes and put a stop ta all of the nonsense.

__________________

"Believe in yourself, if in nothing else."
My myspace page: www.myspace.com/joemage

alex1_phang3

what tsurara said IS CERTAINLY TRUE (a least at where I live).
Here they try to cover up everything, and I'm not afraid to tell you Malaysia's government racist. Seriously, just ask any SANE Malaysians and they'll tell you its true . . .

LenMiyata

Grumble Grumble Grumble

The thing is, any source of information has to be taken with a grain of salt. The facts are almost never stated in terms of black and white, and usually are in many different shades of grades. Even information after the fact is never clear cut. If everyone knows what happened, then why are there so many different history books that cover the same events?

There is a partial solution to the issue of biased news reporting. There's this wonderful new information sharing technology (called the Internet) that allows you access sites by different groups posting all around the world. With this access, you now have the normal issues of deciding on the quality of the information offered, the motivation of the poster, and if the information adds to your knowledge, or contradicts something that you already know to be true.

__________________

Tetsanosuke Kirikami

__________________

Abu Dhabi

one time i heard Marylin Manson say " the media promotes fear and consumption" and as gay as it sounds, i'd have to agree with the man/girl/flower thingie...


news has never really been news, it's been gossip. whether or not it has a suit on, it's still gossip/other people's business. i mean, the big story in LA right now is a cougar lose in the mountains that killed a dog (that part made me cry, HE DIED DOING HIS JOB!), so now they're going to be talking about that until some lady gets kidnapped or some fire happens in Malibu... again... (it does suck for them there, keep them in your prayers/crossed fingers/good thoughts!)

so, i watch it becuz Simpsons or something comes on right after... and it is also good to keep up with current events. it helps with conversation topics, which improve your social skills... which benefit many things!

__________________

Arrianna

Having spoken to someone from Egypt on the subject and having done research on it I would say that once you get outside of "democratic" countries having the government control the content of the news is standard. The problem that creates is that the people living there know and accept that. As a result when something is printed in a "democratic" newspaper they will believe that it is sanctioned by that government as well when usually nothing could be further from the truth. The implications of that and potential for misunderstandings are mind boggling.

By people who either don't watch it or believe that being "fair and balanced" means having the right opinion. Fox does their best to be fair and balanced by providing both sides of situations. It is more a statement on other news networks when decidedly moderate people on Fox are considered conservative by other news standards. But then when you are that far to the left anything toward the middle leans to the right.

CNN has compromised itself again and again on it's standards and legitimacy. I haven't believed almost anything they have said since after Iraq fell and they found records of massive torture and CNN went, "oh we knew about those but we didn't say anything because then no one would let us interview them". Yet just two weeks earlier they had been telling everyone they didn't exist. Yet somehow they have Glen Beck... who I do believe. Perhaps it's because he has a no interference deal with them.

Heck yeah, the news has always been about telling people things to make money. Are we being lied to, often. The only way to fix it is to set a higher standard of what you will believe and not give your money to the ones who don't match it.

Guess again. The instant the only difference between two sources is their face you have a problem. Canada has some strict regulations on whether certain things can be reported and have blacklisted outside sources that don't match it. You are receiving a government censored view of the truth. Congratulations. It's not as bad as the middle east news (thank heavens) but I would be concerned all the same if I was you.

__________________

l Stone Hold l Now We're Cooking! l

BrightShadow_96

I believe news shows will do anything they need to to get better ratings. I'm not sure if they would completely lie about any certain issue, (unless it's something extremely significant) though I do think that they would "fib" about issues, slightly exaggerating or under exaggerating some smaller details. I do believe that they would withhold a lot of information if they felt like it, though. And, for all I know, the government may be preventing news shows from broadcasting certain reports.. I, myself, do not have enough information to make a definite conclusion.

__________________

aceman67

And where'd you find that out, because I think you're wrong.

__________________

Arrianna

I first became aware of it when I lived in Canada over 10 years ago and was informed of the standards and what could be done to enforce them by politically active citizens. Since then Canada has enacted several additional laws concerning appropriate and acceptable standards for reporting media from news to the internet. You may not see the exterior consequences of it but each time a US source of opinion that is impacted by those laws is denied access in Canada it gets reported here. At that point it is a simple matter to search the Canadian news media and find a giant hole on reporting those views and subjects. It has become less common under the more conservative government that was voted in recently but in cases of this kind of government oversight it is often difficult to see when you are living inside it. That is why it IS so concerning in places where there is total government control of the news media. Why shouldn't they believe what they are told? They have no reason not to.

Think of it this way, if someone tells you that their spouse never disagrees with them what do you think? Obviously someone is not being heard. If you tell me there is no difference between news agencies that tells me that only one point of view is being given since it is natural for people to have differences of opinion.

__________________

l Stone Hold l Now We're Cooking! l