UNIT 26 Media Coverage

What do we expect from those stalwart people
who report the news? A past generation of journalists
prided itself on the image of the fearless objective reporter,
whose slogan was, "Just the facts, Ma'am." All editorializing
was left to the editorials pages.
Then the so called "investigative journalist"was born.
They blurred the distinction between reporting and editorializing.
Invest igative journalism seems to see its job as a mission to expose
wrongdoing and corruption in high places. Of course,
on occasion these journalists do a good deed.
And with the birth of the investigative journalist
came the inevitable News Shows!
They've blurred the distinction between news and entertainment,
often seeming to cater to the public's taste for scandal and
gossip than for real news.
Put them all together and they make up the Media.
The media holds vast potential for education
as well as the broadening of individual viewpoints.
Conversely, it often has a frightening power to
manipulate the minds of the masses.
This last fact is demonstrated by millions
who have become media dependent. Yes it's true.
Just as there are people who are alcohol?dependent.
Just look at the effect the media has on most people's political views.
Elections are sometimes indirectly decided by
what the media presents to the public. We often choose political leaders
in campaigns conducted in large part in the news, whether it's
in the form of newspapers or television. It's all the same.
And the nastier the campaign, the more coverage it gets.
One main area that many people have allowed the media to
shape their views on is race relations.
Because of the TV images of places that few of the viewers have ever visited,
and incidents that they didn't actually witness
and are not truly well informed about, personal decisions are made.
Our fears and doubts about racial bias,
rapists and their victims, world hunger or what have you,
are aroused and fueled by a sensation?hungry media.
It is also the media that either keeps us pumped up
and excited about these issues or that lets
our excitement dwindle and subside. But where does it all start?
Where does the finished product come from?
Who is behind deciding what we all get to actually see in the end?
Whatever it is that we are seeing and reading about the issues
mentioned above, and indeed countless others,
all depends on the judgment of editors and network executives
who are more or less self?appointed judges of what
is newsworthy and what is not. Do you know what it is
that most often determines what goes on the front page of a newspaper
and what is lost in its back pages?
Marketing. Marketing judgment is foremost in making these decisions.
Secondly there's editorial judgment.
"What is good for the public to hear on this issue?"
That is the question that they ask themselves,
and when they formulate an answer
they believe to be pleasing enough,
then they put it all together and present it.
I have noticed that whenever the media focuses sharply on candidates
for the presidency or especially for the Supreme Court,
more often than not we learn more about their pasts
than their current standing on health insurance,abortion,
the death penalty or what have you. The media tries to sensationalize
their youthful experiments with cocaine or their talks behind closed doors,
like these are truly important errors.
In today's permissive and often pervasive society,
it would be an odd thing indeed if a candidate appeared who
didn't have any fault, wouldn't it? Anyway, for many viewers,
and especially our younger generations,
the faces that come up on the media screens are more real
and more interesting than those of their coworkers, neighbors and schoolmates.
Our judicial system could use tuning up too in various areas.
More and more in recent years it seems that contributory negligence is not
a viable factor in many lawsuits. Take this one case in particular.
It happened some years back, I disremember where I read it.
A guy decided to perform a stupid stunt,
so he strapped a refrigerator onto his back and ran.
It was a truly idiotic thing to do.
One of the straps broke, the guy fell down
when the weight of the refrigerator shifted on his back.
The refrigerator naturally fell on top of him.
He got hurt, and he sued the manufacturer that made the broken strap.
Believe it or not, he won! Believe it or not,
a judge actually awarded him a cool million for his troubles.
No wonder it is that everywhere you look there are tort lawyers advertising
their services to sue people on your behalf.
What effect does that kind of idiotic suit have on small business?
Many small companies can not afford to pay off a million dollar lawsuit
and continue to thrive.One more really curious thing.
Nowadays it seems popular to try to get government grants.
There is a book that tells one how to apply
and get these grants for practically any reason.
There once was supposedly a team of young scientists
who applied for and actually received a $5 000 000 grant
in order to do a study of the effects of bacteria on global warming.
Is it true? I don't know. I wouldn't say it didn't happen.
Do we know our world well enough? Yes we know some of
our world on a first hand basis but most of it we know through the media.
Is that a sad thing or a good thing?
I suppose it depends on whether or not the media
does accurate reporting.
For instance, some people in a television audience may not know
one single African American personally,
but he or she does know the media versions of some African Americans
and their stereotypes: the up?to?date wise?cracking tough LA street kid
(who might be male or female), Bill Cosby (who is described as kindly,
forever smiling and self?depreciating), or Mike Tyson
(described as the violent and self?destructive black male).
Yes, the media magnates are undisputed experts at playing out with loving detail,
the personal disasters, heroic rescues, and petty scandals that
they know the viewers love. However,they take no responsibility whatsoever
for providing true insights on credible issues like the politics of race,
immigration, education, the national debt, mental health, or unemployment.
Now I ask you: How does the media shape or distort our reality on a daily basis?
Do they always skim the surface of our reality,
soundly biting into it at given points and taking away the bits that allow us
a chance for thinking about cause and effect? Are we always to be no more than
helpless "target audiences" sitting around a television screen taking in the hype?
Or can we do something to influence the steady stream of images
and ideas that the media present to us?