Why is everything the media's fault?

[Hippo_Tron]

I'm seriously not understanding why everybody hates the media for one reason or another. Liberals say it's too conservative, conservatives say it's too liberal. I always thought the media's goal was to get as many viewers or readers as physically possible because that makes the most money. I've never really thought of them as being out to sabotage one candidate because they don't like him or promote Bush because they think he's a great president. I always thought that they put on TV what would get them the most viewers and in turn sell their advertising space for the most money. What am I missing?

[Dookus]

1. I agree with you

but I'm in the minority here.

Clearly, unless one's favorite candidate wins, it's the fault of media bias.

[Terwilliger]

3. so, IYO, the media coverage of the two candidates in 2000...

was fair and balanced?

[Hippo_Tron]

10. No but why should it be?

If the media makes more money saying one thing about one candidate then they are a private corporation and have the right to do so. You don't expect Wal Mart to stop using cheap overseas labor so why do you expect the media to give fair and balanced coverage?

[Terwilliger]

13. #1...I didn't ask you....#2...didn't you start the thread saying the media

wasn't biased and why are people blaming the media for this and that?

[Hippo_Tron]

16. I'm saying that they are biased...

In the sense that they will say whatever makes them the most money, not what will make George Bush win another term.

[Terwilliger]

21. that IS making them the most money

[thermodynamic]

2. The media has control, wants more control, they all say the same thing...

...often WORD FOR WORD.

You are correct, it's about what makes the most money. Not freedom. Not freedom of speech. Not objectivity. Not even a dissenting viewpoint, unless it's followed up by some form of sarcasm, discrete or otherwise. Can't anger the viewers, unless it's about something they can't control or do anything about... (so what's the fucking point about the news then?!)

[Hippo_Tron]

6. Well here's why I don't see why there's anything wrong...

Lets say I turn on CNN or go to CNN.com and I read that today...
Wesley Clark dropped out of the race and endoresed John Kerry, white house releases documents proving Bush's service in the national guard, CBS fined for showing janets tits on TV, more people died in Iraq today, etc.
Basically all I get is a sense of the major headlines or developments during of that day with no opinions whatsoever. Should I actually give a crap about something I will log onto DU or watch C-Span or something. But its not like CNN tells me what to think it just gives me a sense of whats going on in the world in a short period of time. Are most people not like this?

[papau]

14. story selection, words used to frame event - all control viewer reaction

partial truth is the lie most often used.

[boobooday]

4. Think Vertical Integration

Two examples of what we have to understand about the media:

Example: The washington post editorial page gets all weird, and journalistic hero Bob Woodward writes a butt-kissing propoganda piece about the Chimp.

Fact: The Washington Post also owns the Kaplan company, and will make a killing off the "No Child Left Behind" act, which will just relentlessly test our children until they are all good Bushbots.

Example: General Electric owns NBC/MSNBC and more. They are the biggest polluter and a defense contractor as well. Whose policies are more favorable to them?

This is just a small sample of the outrageous conflicts of interest that exist in our media.

http://www.wgoeshome.com

Jeanette

[Hippo_Tron]

8. Yeah but I'd hope that most people who read editorials...

Can also think for themselves and not let the people writing the editorials think for them. I mean its not like on CNBC news they have the anchor person saying "President Bush was accused by the DNC chairman of being AWOL and this is an outrageous accusation."

[historian]

20. you have nailed the problem

YOu assume that people think for themselves. Thats the basic fallacy. Ask most people what they think of a certain politician or candidate (mostly freepers) and you hear a cliche or repetition of some so called journalist.
IF they were able to think for themselves and realize what was happening they would simply sit home?

[Hippo_Tron]

22. Well when I see somebody who repeats the arguments of a journalist...

Or even worse Rush Limbaugh, I figure that they've had that political mentality so forced into their head that no other opinions will matter to them. I'm talking about the people who aren't really all that into politics and just go vote every four years. I'd wouldn't expect them to be repeating the arguments of Rush Limbaugh as their political thought. And if they are, then this country has some serious problems.

[truizm]

5. Manufacturing Consent, Media Control, Necessary Illusions - Noam Chomsky

[Cat Atomic]

7. To me, media bias isn't about slanted election coverage.

It's about omitting stories or views on big subjects like foreign policy, economics, and labor issues. It's harder to get your head around, and it's a very broad kind of bias.

You do find some media bias in election coverage to be sure, but I don't think it's nearly as obvious.

[Hippo_Tron]

9. But why is it the mainstream media's job to cover those stories...

The general population doesn't want to hear about it and if they did, the media would cover it. It just seems to me like people expect the media to be controlled by more than a bunch of greedy corporate executives.

[papau]

17. general population doesn't want to hear about it is story selection bias

GOP editors make that call - and then you get Iraq 911 lies believed - and a popular Bush - and it is just not the media's fault

sigh .......

:-)

[cryofan]

25. just do us a favor...

....google these words: chomsky media consent

And read some of the more detailed pages you get from that query....

[grasswire]

11. take a look at this....

.....and then come back for more discussion. Every year Project Censored puts out a book telling about the top under-covered stories for the year.

http://www.projectcensored.org/publications/2003/

Top Uncovered Media Stories of 2001-2002

#1: FCC Moves to Privatize Airwaves
#2: New Trade Treaty Seeks to Privatize Global Social Services
#3: United States' Policies in Colombia Support Mass Murder
#4: Bush Administration Hampered FBI Investigation 46 into Bin Laden Family Before
#5: U.S. Intentionally Destroyed Iraq's Water System
#6: U.S. Government Pushing Nuclear Revival
#7: Corporations Promote HMO Model for School Districts
#8: NAFTA Destroys Farming Communities in U.S. and Abroad
#9: U.S. Faces National Housing Crisis
#10: CIA Double Deals in Macedonia
#11: Bush Appoints Former Criminals to Key Government Roles
#12: NAFTA's Chapter 11 Overrides Public Protection Laws of Countries
#13: Henry Kissinger and Gerald Ford Lied to the American Public about East Timor
#14: New Laws Restrict Access to Abortions in U.S.
#15: Bush's Energy Plan Threatens Environment and Public Health
#16: CIA Kidnaps Suspects for Overseas Torture and Execution
#17: Corporate Media Ignores Key Issues of the Anti-Globalization Protests
#18: World's Coral Reefs Dying
#19: American Companies Exploit the Congo
#20: Novartis's Gene Research Endangers Global Plant Life
#21: Large U.S. Temp Company Undermines Union Jobs and Mistreats Workers
#22: Fish Farms Threaten Health of Consumers and Aquatic Habitats
#23: Horses Face Lives of Unnecessary Abuse for Drug Company Profits
#24: Wal-mart Takes Union Busting to the State Level
#25: Federal Government Bails Out Failing Private Prisons

[grasswire]

12. 2003

Top 25 Censored Media Stories of 2002-2003

#1: The Neoconservative Plan for Global Dominance
#2: Homeland Security Threatens Civil Liberty
#3: US Illegally Removes Pages from Iraq U.N. Report
#4: Rumsfeld's Plan to Provoke Terrorists
#5: The Effort to Make Unions Disappear
#6: Closing Access to Information Technology
#7: Treaty Busting by the United States
#8: US/British Forces Continue Use of Depleted Uranium Weapons Despite Massive Evidence of Negative Health Effects
#9: In Afghanistan: Poverty, Women's Rights, and Civil Disruption Worse than Ever
#10: Africa Faces Threat of New Colonialism
#11: U.S. Implicated in Taliban Massacre
#12: Bush Administration Behind Failed Military Coup in Venezuela
#13: Corporate Personhood Challenged
#14: Unwanted Refugees a Global Problem
#15: U.S. Military's War on the Earth
#16: Plan Puebla-Panama and the FTAA
#17: Clear Channel Monopoly Draws Criticism
#18: Charter Forest Proposal Threatens Access to Public Lands
#19: U.S. Dollar vs. the Euro: Another Reason for the Invasion of Iraq
#20: Pentagon Increases Private Military Contracts
#21: Third World Austerity Policies: Coming Soon to a City Near You
#22: Welfare Reform Up For Reauthorization, but Still No Safety Net
#23: Argentina Crisis Sparks Cooperative Growth
#24: Aid to Israel Fuels Repressive Occupation in Palestine
#25: Convicted Corporations Receive Perks Instead of Punishment

[Hippo_Tron]

15. It's because people don't want to hear this stuff...

If the media aired these stories then people would go "oh the cable news people are just left wing nutballs" and they would stop watching, thus less money for the cable news corporations. If printing or showing these stories would get them millions of new viewers, they'd show them in a heartbeat.

[papau]

18. ok - media management would agree with you - 'cause they are not

right wing GOP controlled - they just act like they are.

[wuushew]

19. It is the government that allows the media to operate not the market

Since the airways are for the public good there is a considerable interest in maintaing an informed and educated public. Without democracy cannot not operate.

Ignorance and stupidity are a downward spiral.

[Hippo_Tron]

23. But its not the government's job to make sure the media informs the public

Their job is to make sure that the media is ALLOWED to do so. And sadly I think that they do the exact opposite with the FCC regulations and such.

[cryofan]

24. NO, it is govt's job to make the media do whatever we citizens WANT

If we citizens decide that we want the media to start every news broadcast with a summary of the shortcomings of corporate capitalism, then govt should make it so. The govt is the handmaiden of the people.

[depakid]

26. Media law 101

You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of broadcast licensing and the purpose of media regulation- or at least what was for 60+ years the purpose, before Republicans (and Bill Clinton) subverted the FCC.

Here's a few snippets from a Pace Law Review Article that may help you understand why your comments are so off base:

The theory underlying broadcast regulation is that a broadcast license is a public trust, and that a broadcast licensee is therefore a public trustee. A license is temporary authority from the federal government to use one of the scarce and publicly owned broadcast channels. In exchange for the privilege of using this scarce public resource and for being allowed to profit from such use, the licensee is obligated to serve the public interest, convenience, or necessity.

As the Supreme Court has stated, the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States "rests on the assumption that the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources is essential to the welfare of the public." That radio and television broadcast stations play an important role in providing news and opinion is obvious.

Thus, as broadcasting evolved to play an increasingly important role in American society, the interpretation of the public interest standard as applied to broadcasting grew to take on constitutional proportions. The Commission's concern in this area was manifested through the establishment of a number of rules and procedures intended to ensure that broadcast licensees served the public interest.

The public interest standard as it applies to broadcasting has never been interpreted to mean simply what the public wants to hear or view. Rather, much of the scholarly writing on the standard focuses also on what the public ought to hear or view. This phrasing perhaps only restates the first amendment concerns of the courts and the Commission that an informed electorate is essential to the effective working of democratic government. Unless the electorate has sufficient information to make informed decisions, democratic government cannot work.

[morgan2]

27. oh what a cute little idea of yours

for a simple example of how the media's goal isn't to make money off the media, it's to promote ideas, look at the handling of the run up to the Iraq war. Phil Donahue, who had the highest rated show on MSNBC, was fired because they didn't want to have someone with antiwar ideas. They didn't cover the antiwar protests until like the 5th one. Protests this large give a lot of sensational pictures and images of people clashing in the streets, and would get them a lot of views whether or not they agree with the protest.

[Skittles]

28. it IS the media's fault

Bush would never have been able to steal the election without the help of the media who up until NOW have NEVER HELD HIM ACCOUNTABLE. For ANYTHING.