MyFox
 

Clarity in a world of chaos

by Herschel from You don't know, do you?

Last Post 234 days, 5 hours Ago


Media: Can we change it? Should we change it?
Jul 2, 2007 | 2:12 PM
Category: Entertainment
Report This Post

I often hear (and read) how the media tends to support leftist ideals and the right only has conservative talk radio to get their message out.  Like Obi-Wan Kenobi told Luke Skywalker, “Luke, many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our point of view”.  That’s what it’s really all about- personal perspective.  If you agree with what’s being said.  Then media is great.  If you don’t agree, then several media outlets, and thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of competing news agency reporters, producers, and writers- came together to lie to the people in order to push a political (or personal) agenda.  

Now, it may sound like I believe in the media.  For the most part I do. I mean, I can’t be everywhere in the world, every minute of the day- so I have to rely on the media to keep me informed about what’s happening beyond what’s within my own eyesight and earshot.  Am I being lied to?  Maybe, maybe not.  However, I can’t prove they are lying…  I can’t prove there’s even a possibility they are trying to skew the news- without doing what?  That’s right- going to a different media outlet.  One with their own agenda as well.  Therefore, what I chose to believe, or discount depends greatly on my personal point of view.  It doesn’t make my point of view right.  Nevertheless, it’s my point of view. Then, it comes down to statistics- presented as “facts”. From my first QC class, I have been taught that you can take statistics, and make them say whatever you want to say.  Informative, yet- meaningless.
 

So, what’s the regular Joe to do?  What are we to believe?  Do we believe CNN or Fox? Do we believe Bryan Williams or Katie Couric?
 

While I agree the media tends to exaggerate up whatever will get viewers watching- whether that involves spinning it, using inflammatory words, or keeping viewers in suspense until the 10 o'clock show, when the facts were available for the noon show. Honestly: What else would you have the media do? 
 

I cannot say the media is right, but- once you cut through the BS & fluff, the story is there. 
 

There is no escape from media- and no matter whether you get your news from BBC, CNN, and Al Jazerra-; you are still getting someone's VERSION of the news.  You view/hear/read a version, which received a draft from the writers, followed by additional polishing & tweaking by everyone downstream who had to approve it. This was again polished by their boss, which was polished again by the segment producer, before it gets to our ears.  Same with before it goes to print for our eyes.

 So, how can we change media?  I don't believe we can...

Media has been around since the gazettes of Greek & Roman times, up to and including the internet. It's interwoven into our very being.  Moreover, it's revenue generating- so there is going to be a bit of a slant to get viewers watching...  How else will CBS pay Katie Couric all those millions?  Advertisement dollars.  How will they pull in advertisement dollars?  VIEWERS.

So, with that said- How can we change the media?  I don't think we can, and media has no incentive to change to fit what some believe it should be.  Media has existed since there were more than three people- so one could tell the other- what the third person did.  Media has been a part of humanity since writing and reading became commonplace.

What can be done, in 2007- to "change" media?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

13 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 13
Page 1 of 1
chardoney read my blog view my photos
Jul 2, 2007 | 3:27 PM

Why does media need to be changed? ALL the public needs and requires is factual,honest reporting. Not agenda and propaganda.
Truth is a precious thing, as are facts and honesty. That has been sorely missing in most of the media for a long time. Why do you think little FNC is so hated? Why Coulter and Limbaugh and many others? If you don't know, I can't tell you.
If one can't 'see' it, then one just can't. I for one, can.
hillsborohillbilly read my blog view my photos
Jul 2, 2007 | 6:06 PM

hershel , so many words written , that i had to speed read to just catch highlites . your statement on another blog , always left , always right , always wrong.... ring true like a church bell on sunday
hillsborohillbilly read my blog view my photos
Jul 2, 2007 | 6:09 PM

you also made a comment on another blog , a while ago, that has stuck in my head every since. you were commenting on the war in Iraq . you being a gulf war guy said, "we got in ,we got the job done , we left " . more words that ring true , you have all my respect and cudos ( for what it's worth ) keep on keeping on
Herschel read my blog
Jul 2, 2007 | 7:12 PM

Thanks Hillsboro and Char....

No, I'm not saying the media shoudl change... But, many say the news we get is unreliable, left slanted, etc... My question is, how can we fix it? That is- if it's broke...
Herschel read my blog
Jul 2, 2007 | 7:35 PM

I never really paid attention to FNC, until I was here at home one day, doing homework- and the TV was on FNC. It just happened to be the same day Alec Baldwin's message to his daughter was broadcast to the world. As bad as it was, hearing it all day, it got worse when Hannidy & Colmes came on.

I have no proble with people telling the truth. I don't a problem with how people say, what they say- when it's the truth. But, as a reporter/newscaster/host, on a news channel, we should get better service. When a person in that position inserts thier personal opinion on the news as if it's factual; then I do have a problem with that. Especially when you accuse other outlets of doing it, then turn around and do THE SAME THING, when you're given a voice. They have a word for that. Hypocrite.

That is what Hannidy and whatever that lady's name was- did that night. I'm sure there have been more nights, but- as I said- I rarely watch FNC. I find it hard to believe they share DNA with Fox4.

I hear the same kind of crap (in the evenings) on CNN too. I have CNN on my XM radio, and that is garbage too. I thought to myself, did National Enquirer buy CNN?
ryngwrayth read my blog view my photos
Jul 2, 2007 | 8:01 PM

Herschel...I was watching the HBO series "Rome" ad in it there was I suppose the "media man" of that day. In his toga....standing outside the Senate...reading from his tablet, which presumably he wrote. It was true enough, what he'd cry out to the passing people...but always with some satire, some clever skew of his own...or one from someone else perhaps who paid him well.

The citizens bustled about his feet as he stands there on his little platform...ignoring him, but absorbing anyways...and spreading what they heard to the next person...with their own little spin.

We don't need to change the media...we have access to a world of media...and if you wonder about something....research many outlets. The truth as that show used to say...IS out there.
KellerKowboy read my blog view my photos
Jul 2, 2007 | 9:15 PM

In my lifetime, where it all started down the slippery slope, was when newspaper editors started publicly supporting political candidates. It wasn't long before the candidates realized an endorsement from the New York Times was worth a LOT of votes because the editor was trusted by the people. Next thing you know, every jerk-water town's newspaper editor was supporting a particular candidate and political bias was rampant.

It was like choosing up sides for a kickball game. The press and media started getting actively involved in partisan politics just to keep up with the "other guys" in the business. They had to, really....just for those Neilson ratings numbers.

Unfortunately, the mainstream media has gone the way of the supermarket tabloids. Major newsworthy events are happening and the big networks are covering Paris Hilton. Something really wrong with that picture, but it give us all an excellent idea of what the media feels is important.

Nothing will change any time soon - not when dollars are more important than sense!!
KellerKowboy read my blog view my photos
Jul 2, 2007 | 10:22 PM

A classic example in today's news. Presidents Bush and Putin are meeting in Maine. They certainly have much to discuss.

FNC's web site displays this headline:

"Bush, Putin Unite Against Iran's Nukes"

CNN's web site sees it this way:

"Bush, Putin collide on missile defense

Two totally different stories, really, and two totally different angles for a lead. One positive in nature, the other negative.

If you're married to just one, you're only getting a steady diet of that outlet's political stance.

I know it's often a pain, but take in as many different angles as you can.
Herschel read my blog
Jul 3, 2007 | 9:21 AM

"I know it's often a pain, but take in as many different angles as you can."

I couldn't agree more...

In a media class I took, we looked at two stories about the same event. One was Fox4, the other was WFAA.

WFAA had something like: Students trapped on bus by floodwaters.

Fox 4 called it: "Death Trip"

Same story, same end-result- but, they went in different directions in setting the story up.

No one was killed- but, which title would have caught the attention of the most viewers?

Ryng: Those criers were paid with coins called "Gazettes", soon the papers that followed were called gazettes. Whish lead to many of the older newspapers being called the same. My local newspaper back home, is one of the oldest news papers in the USA. The Tensas Gazette.

Home: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tensas_Parish,_Louisiana
GRAYWOLF read my blog view my photos
Jul 3, 2007 | 9:22 AM

For the most part I agree with you. In order to change things, it would take a conscious effort on the part of the prime demographic. Money (advertising) is the driver of content. Ratings is the driver of money.

This is what happened to Air America. No one wanted to hear the leftist view on radio. FNC does so well because it is the only consistently "right" TV outlet. Everyone else has to share viewers.

There is no media outlet that doesn't have a bias. Freetalklive.com has a pro-constitutional bias, as opposed to right or left bias, but it is still a bias. None of the mainstream media takes that position.
GRAYWOLF read my blog view my photos
Jul 3, 2007 | 9:24 AM

"Same story, same end-result- but, they went in different directions in setting the story up."

If you look at the "2" political parties, you will see the same thing. They are almost always arguing for the same thing, just wording it differently. That is how they keep us arguing in favor of government control.
UCantHandleThisTruth read my blog
Jul 3, 2007 | 10:17 AM

Dont really need to change the media.
As long as theire are outlets that can report their side thats life.

But beofre the internet and before FoxNews there is no doubt that the media has/had a bias towards liberalism.

In fact there a few defectors from the liberal camp who will spell it out with FACts TO BACK THEM UP.

Bernard goldberg/dick morris/even to a degree, the comic who goes on O'reilly sometimes, former SNL wise guy.....

Liberals tend to be young and naive, idealistic gonna change the world.
Not bad thoughts but it leads to a bias as would/does old, stuck in their way types.
UCantHandleThisTruth read my blog
Jul 3, 2007 | 10:19 AM

GREYWOLF,
glad someone(s)else gets it about the government

Same difference keeps us fighting and the public wont take a chance and get a third party in there JUST TO TEACH THEM A LESSON, shake up the system and right this country back to free amrket capitalism so there is hope that you can make it, not wait, like Katrina folks for Ray Nagin and his haters to come to your rescue
Page 1 of 1


Write your comment below:




Herschel

Dallas, (75287) by way of Waterproof, LA (71375). 10-year Army vet. 10 years in corporate America. Husband, Father, Son, Christian, Part-Time Comedian.

Member Since: 10/9/2006