|
The
Diseased Media
August 16, 2001
by
Joshua Downing
There has been much discussion about the sorry state of journalism
today. When we peruse through the TV channels or pages in
the newspapers, we see a wasteland, reeking of stale opinions
and regurgitated quotes and sound bites. Once you begin digging
further down through the piles of trash and broken glass,
you begin to see a similar theme repeated throughout all of
the media landscapes. Those who try to label this particular
idea either conservative, or right wing are missing the point.
The main problem that is corroding our media's integrity is
not the fact that it is tilted in favor of the right, but
the fact that it is tilted in any particular direction in
the first place. This presents an interesting question. Is
the solution to this obviously askew conservative bent an
equally tilted favoritism to the left, or a balanced, unbiased,
and impartial perspective?
While it is certainly necessary to offer both sides of the
political spectrum with a voice, we can do this other ways
besides offering a counterpoint to the conservative media.
By having two separate media beasts battling an unholy war
for market share and control of the American public's minds,
we have not solved anything. We do not need two media giants
struggling to destroy one another in an effort to sway the
public from one point of view to another. We already have
fierce ideological wars being fought, and two media conglomerates
combating each other across thickly drawn lines of partisanship
will just add fuel to the fire.
Journalism isn't about offering one side of a political
debate. I believe that its intentions are more honorable than
that. Journalism is designed to offer facts, untainted by
loaded words, thinly veiled criticism, and subtle partisan
leanings. However, over the last decade, these journalistic
integrities have devolved into mere shadows of their former
selves. The media has simply become a boxing ring, placing
a view, idea, or a politician into its squared circle of abuse
for the purpose of dismantling and discrediting it if it does
not correlate with their own views. While it is necessary
to show the weaknesses of any particular media fixation, when
that is all they show it is apparent that they have not done
their job. This is becoming increasingly hard, even for those
who wish to rock the status quo by doing a well-rounded presentation
of the facts.
With media conglomeration and corporate ties, there arise
many conflicts with various stories. It would be easy to simply
place the blame on the shoulders of the corporations that
seemingly control all aspects of the media today. However,
ample responsibility should also be placed on the reporters
who appear more than willing participants in their employer's
attempts at media manipulation. Perhaps there is no one source
that we can single out as the corruptors of fair media, but
there are many culprits. These sullied propagators will never
admit the influences that have control over how news is reported,
just as many have never acknowledged the label of "conservative"
for the media as an appropriate adjective.
This is disenchanting, because as long as there is no mainstream
coverage regarding the biases that exist within the media,
there is no reason for the general public to believe that
there is any partiality involved in political coverage, and
therefore they continue to believe that the news they receive
is balanced and fair. This is where the main influence of
media is most apparently exhibited. The masses of apolitical
and non-involved citizens patch their uneducated political
philosophies from these so-called fair news sources and have
no reason to believe that they are biased in favor of one
particular side. These media outlets often offer a unilateral
approach to the issues, which usaually demonizes the opposing
views. This will obviously sway those who don't have a firm
grasp on the issues to whatever viewpoint is deemed appropriate
by the media. Sadly this viewpoint is almost always that associated
with the right. Therefore, the proper definitions of the right,
moderate, and left have become blurred, whether intentionally
or not.
The blurring of political lines has led to misconceptions
regarding the suitable associations to be made with either
the right or left. Many have been duped into believing that
the left wing is by their very nature unconstitutional and
godless. Due to the current state of the media, attacks on
the right have been less severe; the right is often considered
to be completely composed of either crazy militants or devout
religious hypocrites. These stereotypes are reinforced daily,
until they finally become irreversible and permanent caricatures.
This kind of labeling leads to false connotations to be connected
with Democrats and Republicans, and further clouds the real
issues at the center.
Reporting seems to be less about the views on issues that
politicians represent and more about the cliched attributes
regarding their party association. There is no place in the
market-driven, fast-paced world of journalism for deep investigations
and commentary on a politicians' views, only enough room in
the headline for a sensational sex-related event, that will
draw readers into the illicit world of politics. Scandals
not only attract readers, they also allow for smear campaigns
against a particular candidate or office-holder. Thus scandalmongering
becomes a journalists' best friend when placed in the context
of today's vapid reporting. Not only will it increase sales,
but also allow for a misrepresentation of a politician, without
having to attack their possibly credible political ideas.
Character assassination is one of the most powerful weapons
in a journalist's arsenal, because it does not need to have
reliable sources or verified information. At least, those
items seem to be optional based on many of the blatantly false
reports seen in the last decade. Without adding to the current
media saturation regarding two of the most notorious cases
of character assassination by analyzing them in depth, the
current sensationalistic feeding frenzy regarding Gary Condit
as well as the eight years of attempts to discredit and impeach
Bill Clinton may be offered as representations of what the
media is capable of doing. These two smear campaigns can be
used as watermarks in order to measure the ferocity of other
deceptive and false accusations made by the media. They may
also be used as indicators of the decline of journalistic
integrities, as well as the methods that the biased media
will use to further their own political agendas.
There may be no one remedy for this contagious disease that
is seemingly running rampant through the media. However a
mass revolution and demand for fair, unbiased media may prove
effective for curtailing the current trends becoming more
evident. Citizens who deem it necessary to have a media that
presents facts and not solely opinions, must mobilize and
take in active part in deciding the future of our media landscape.
They must thrust their distaste into the faces of the media
manipulators and controllers. This will prove that the majority
don't want their brand of journalism. There must be a rising
voice of dissent from viewers, as well as a boycott of the
media outlets and their advertisers.
Inaction can only prove what the corporate masters and their
media puppets already believe, that this nation is ambivalent
and uncaring towards the disappearance of journalistic reliability.
They believe that this country prefers scandals and smear
campaigns to fact-based reporting and a close analysis of
the issues that mold the world. Obviously the necessity to
show the demand for such reporting is apparent, but until
people can mount a visible opposition to the biased media,
they will continue to ram their views down our throats until
we gag on our own inaction.
View
All Articles
|
