In my last two articles, I’ve discussed (and you have responded) to two major media issues: “Media Conspiracy: Myth or Reality?” and “Media Destroying Its Own Credibility and Future”. The biggest questions remaining, of course, are how and why is the mainstream media losing its punch?
The basic answer, as I see it: a general disrespect by the media owners themselves for the intelligence/initiative/independence of today’s readers, listeners and viewers.
Mid-level media bosses, I feel, too often reflect their owners’ political and/or personal points of view or agendas: and, if they want to keep their jobs, they are probably right. So maybe that’s why we see, offered up so often, one-sided “news” stories; wherever possible giving free/easy rides to those of the center/right who their “owners” favour; while ignoring or giving critical coverage of those on the left, who they don’t; and by hiring mostly right of center columnists/broadcast hosts who share their views.
And, as earlier discussed, this does not require regular telephone calls from the owner patriarch(s) to lay down the law: hiring the “right” top and middle range management people for the job ensures the work is done on behalf of the owners … the conservative or right of center point of view is pushed … and, everyone, except the public, is served..
Is there anyone within major media management who could honestly face their readers, viewers and listeners and say, with a straight face, that left-wing points of view are anything close to being EQUALLY represented in their numbers of covered stories/columnists/talk show hosts the mainstream media dish out to their audiences?
EQUALLY? Not today! Right wing rules! I can’t name even ONE left-wing regular talk show host! But I’m sure most readers/listeners could name SEVERAL columnists/hosts they see as having an overall center-right point of view.
Left-wing/liberal views on social issues are tolerated … but only as long as the hosts/columnists fall right into line on the more important fiscal/economic/labour/political issues. And I truly believe any regular expression of left-wing points of view on these latter matters will soon see that columnist/radio talk show host looking for other work.
What’s wrong with that? After all, in 1844, Reformer George Brown set up his own newspaper, today’s Globe and Mail, to push his own political Reform Party’s point of view. And many newspapers have long, respectable ideologically-biased histories.
What’s wrong is that today, when a single corporation can number its media outlets by the dozen … new rules must apply to protect the public’s right to decide for themselves; to allow us to see/read several points of view; and MOST OF ALL, to respect our ability to tune out, when we realize that what the media moguls are giving us is one-sided claptrap that is sometimes more propaganda than news or really freestyle discussion.
Not to mention all the irrelevant filler and press-conference puffery they too often pass off as news, also turning off “regulars” more and more frequently.
But the new generation owners clearly lack the smarts of their forefathers, who knew how to deliver a “popular” product, with much more independent newsrooms, drawing in the readers, listeners and viewers in record numbers …. and profiting handsomely from it all.
Today, I think the big mistake is that those footing the big bills prefer to revel in their own ego-trips … pushing their own personal views/agendas … not realizing that their readers and audiences are much more sophisticated than in the past … can see the slant … and thus, the dropping numbers.
Thanks to the Internet, where alternative newspapers from around the world can now be accessed; where widely disparate radio and even televisions shows from across the globe can be seen; and where even bloggers promote a more freewheeling discussion of issues and events than the mainstream media … the public have smartened up.
They want real discussion of real issues .. and when they know they are being served up one-sided (usually conservative or right wing) propaganda … they are putting down the papers, tuning out the talk shows and turning off the channels or taking to the Internet.
The public are clearly not as stupid as many of the media moguls apparently think they are.
And until the owners and their middle management messengers realize that … drop their personal agendas … and raise the quality of the news, the relevance of the discussions and the consistent presentation of differing points of view … they will continue to turn their audiences off … and out.
6 responses so far ↓
1 Ron Johnson // Sep 1, 2008 at 3:57 am
Amazing. Finally someone from ‘the inside’ with the courage to speak out. Hopefully this will encourage others.
2 Clayton Perrin // Sep 1, 2008 at 8:24 am
For the last twent-five years or so we have seen the evolution of the news business. News divisions are now viewed as “revenue centres”, responsible for genereating and maintaining profits. The easist way to do it is “dumb down” the stories and make them as inoffensive as possible, for the financial masters. As you point out the one-sidedness(sorry for the spelling) of the news business it makes one wonder where the Murrows , the Cronkites and Rathers will come from. Will journalism students get into the business for the love of the job or because it is the easiest way to present their political views without running for office.
3 Whistleblowers BC // Sep 1, 2008 at 7:32 pm
(Editors note: I have not personally verified the allegations contained in the following comment. But if true, they are very telling. ho)
Harvey, case in point about the credibility (or lack thereof) of the mainstream media.
Sean Holman (Public Eye Online & 24 Hours) caught CanWest News service using a photoshopped spoof photo of Sarah Palin, the new Republican VP running mate created by blogger, Kodiak Konfidential. As KK points out to Holman in comments on his blog, Canwest simply removed his URL from the original picture that was posted on his blog.
The editors of Canwest should be so embarrassed about this. What a mockery they’re making of serious journalism. And, perhaps there’s a little thing called theft of intellectual property. That image belonged to Kodiak Konfidential and CanWest removed the URL that identified him as the creator. Shoddy, unethical stuff.
You can fool some of the people all of the time
http://www.publiceyeonline.com/
Kodiak Konfidential
http://kodiakkonfidential.blogspot.com/2007/1
2/sarah-in-vogue.html
Republican v-p candidate a little-known beauty queen, gun advocate
Steven Edwards, Canwest News Service
Published: Friday, August 29, 2008
Vancouver Sun
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=3b79f6c7-e4b2-4558-b0ed-054e049279b5
FYI – Here’s a news story about Ms. Palin that will likely never make it into the mainstream media. Kind of makes you wonder what the Republicans were thinking? So, they’ll get the fundamentalists etc. onboard, at the expense of the rest of the voters. Not the smartest strategy at this point in time and it could quite possibly help the Republicans lose this election.
Can anyone in their right mind think that Palin would be capable of acting as VP, or one shudders to think, step in as President, should the aged McCain be unable to perform the duties of the post? I think her even accepting at this point speaks to her lack of judgment and insight into her own capabilities. For her to think that she’s ready to be VP after being mayor of some podunk town in Alaska, then governor for a short time speaks volumes about her (lack of) self-awareness and a frightening over-estimation of her skills and abilities. And as this article states, she was on the longlist of shortlisted candidates. Yikes. The whole thing just reeks of Republican desperation.
http://mudflats.wordpress.com/2008/08/29/what-is-mccain-thinking-one-alaskans-perspective/
4 Patrick Bell (NOT the MLA) // Sep 1, 2008 at 8:57 pm
Mr. O. I am a school teacher. At the grade 6 level, which I currently teach, we deal with media biases, propaganda and exaggeration. And unlike what many “right wing” people may think, I do not force my political viewpoints down the children s throats. What I do do is really emphasis critical thinking when dealing with information coming out of the media. I tell them when something doesn’t seem to make total sense the way it is presented to always to their own due diligence. The internet is a wonderful avenue for them to pursuit for varying viewpoints.
(Response: Terrific, Patrick1 That’s what I’ve always thought teaching should really be about! ho)
5 RossK // Sep 1, 2008 at 10:27 pm
Yup.
That non-consolidated, non editor-yoked, last-of -the-independents, S. M. Holman has the story.
Clearly, this is a case of consolidation wreaking unintended consequences.
And the interesting thing is that, when you go to original perpetrator’s site, you can see that the blind use of the ironically-intended forgery has spread far and wide.
Heckfire, it’s now #1 and #2 on the ‘Teh’.
____
*which is an entirely different kettle of fish than ‘intended’ consequences which some have dubbed ‘News Zombies’, an example of which was the Iranian Badges (non)story that was originally ‘placed’ on A1, above the fold, in the National Post.
.
6 news // Apr 24, 2011 at 6:03 am
Thank you very much for your post! I am very interested in your points.
Leave a Comment
CAPTCHA Code is needed.