A lot has been stated in recent years about the more and more irresponsible news media. For those of us who remember Walter Cronkite, we're amazed by the sleazy depths to which our news media can go nowadays. Their current fascination with Anna Nichole Smith's demise perfectly illustrates those depths.
It's generally speculated that the drive for growing earnings by the company owners of the news outlets, together with fierce and unanticipated competition from the cable channels and Web blogs have motivated a new focus upon the lurid. I'd add the media consultants who insist that interesting to the lowest frequent denominator, not arduous news, brings and retains viewers or berita twitter ayu ting ting terbaru readers. In spite of ourselves, we are especially fascinated by the downfalls and humiliations of our anointed celebrities.
However my concern isn't over this sleaziness. In any case, we will still find, if we search, just a few shops that do focus upon the essential world and native news. A deeper and more insidious difficulty is the honesty of our journalists. I imagine that most individuals go into journalism as a result of they've a super of finding and sharing the reality in regards to the people and issues that type our society. However, like most politicians, they step by step turn out to be distracted and compromised by the pressures to be profitable, to attract and hold viewers/readers, to guide with stories, to bolster a political or social perspective, and so as to add a spin more fascinating and attractive than the opponents on the opposite channels.
And typically those pressures drive a bending or complete loss of the truth. Whereas I perceive that the majority news shops have an expressed, or more usually unexpressed, political leaning, there remains the moral responsibility to be truthful. But what's reality within the context of reporting on occasions and other people? Is it nonetheless being honest if we emphasize these aspects of the story that reinforce our viewpoint while de-emphasizing or ignoring those that do not? Are we serving our viewers and readers if we persistently vilify those in the opposing party while blindly praising and ignoring the faults of these in ours? Or is that simply being disingenuous? Ought to the news media be held accountable, as are the rest of us, after they libel or slander?
Sure, often a grocery store tabloid will lose a slander lawsuit, however seldom do the major newspapers or news channels face such sanctions. When the news media are criticized for their dishonesty, hypocrisy or bias, they cry freedom of speech and partisanship and few wish to take them on. They have develop into relatively above reproach, in comparison with some other group.
And but no other segment of our society can so dramatically influence public opinion and political dealings. The news media now not simply report on occasions, they form and even create the events. They'll make or break political candidates, drive laws, manipulate the economy into and out of recessions, and even alter foreign policy. They've develop into a vital component of our society largely above reproach.
Whereas there is a very real danger in interfering with the news media's ability to report and go wherever they should go, they need to be more aggressively held accountable when they're intentionally untruthful or manipulative. Whereas our political leaders will not probably have the braveness or will to tackle the press, perhaps the comparatively loose and free Internet will do more to show dishonesty wherever and at any time when it occurs.