Tuesday, March 08, 2005
What's in the news?
21 September 2004
Choosing a Media Source
A democracy is about choices, and the ability to make informed decisions is important to the fabric of that democracy. Unfortunately, when the information a society receives is governed by a select few, this information can become slanted. Cross ownership, relaxation of standards, and an uninvolved public have allowed the media to forget the importance of providing fair and accurate reporting..
The recent ability for cross ownership has resulted in the withering and dilution of competition and diversity of view points. This has resulted in reducing the publics’ richness in news consumption. Part of this dilution may be a result of the speed in which information is gathered and delivered. In one hour of programming on MSNBC, for example, only twenty-two minutes of the program were actually used for dispensing information. The remaining thirty-eight were for advertising and sensational lead-in graphics. Newspapers, although owned by the same companies, at least give the consumer access to a larger cross section of stories and information in greater detail..
Another adverse component in the issue of cross ownership and speed of information is the relaxing of standards. The recent development at CBS, formerly the “gold standard” for the news media, is a most glaring example of this relaxation. Checking and re-checking sources should never be considered less important than sensational reporting no matter what the subject. The media have allowed sensational graphics, obviously biased anchormen, and the desire to get a story out to the public as fast as possible overshadow the importance of thorough and accurate news gathering.
Because of these existing failures it is the consumer’s responsibility to research where their information originates. Questions must now be asked; the consumer must now become more involved in news gathering than ever before. The audience must now become the reporter, asking the important questions. Does the source make opposing view points available? In order to make informed decisions and carry on intelligent debates, both sides of any issue should be known. Absent now, since the days of big company ownership, are the opposing views that our parents and grandparents were privy to. Due to this lack of information the publics’ view on any one issue can become slanted.
In whose point of view is the story being told? Knowing only how a large corporation is affected by an event is only half the story. Unless the views of the laborers and the surrounding community are known, it is virtually impossible to understand the full effect of the event. The ability for cross ownership is partially to blame for this all too common occurrence of stories being told in the view of the large corporations. It is imperative to know the possible links between the company that owns the media source and the corporate interests in the story being reported.
Is there diversity among the available panel of experts? A story focusing on the issues pertaining to Hispanics and their community should not be discussed by an all white, all female panel. If an expert panel is discussing politics, an attempt should be made to include as many different party representatives as possible. It is also important to note whether the expert is actually an authority in the field that is being discussed.
Another question to be asked is whether the news outlet uses stereotypes when discussing an issue, or uses pictures and graphics that misrepresent the story. For example, when discussing welfare the focus should not be on African-American women since the welfare system serves people of all races. Care must be made that these stereotypes don’t become accepted facts. It is fairly common to see pictures that do not match articles or graphics that tell half the story
Yes, questions must be asked. No longer is it acceptable for the public to sit idly by and absorb information from one source. Consumers must learn to be informed participants in the dissemination of news. News and newspapers were intended to be participatory from the outset, and this fact makes it inseparable from the democratic process. The public must get involved, make informed choices, and research as much information as possible. As consumers the demand for diversity, lack of stereotypes, and availability of opposing views must be insisted upon.
Choosing a Media Source
A democracy is about choices, and the ability to make informed decisions is important to the fabric of that democracy. Unfortunately, when the information a society receives is governed by a select few, this information can become slanted. Cross ownership, relaxation of standards, and an uninvolved public have allowed the media to forget the importance of providing fair and accurate reporting..
The recent ability for cross ownership has resulted in the withering and dilution of competition and diversity of view points. This has resulted in reducing the publics’ richness in news consumption. Part of this dilution may be a result of the speed in which information is gathered and delivered. In one hour of programming on MSNBC, for example, only twenty-two minutes of the program were actually used for dispensing information. The remaining thirty-eight were for advertising and sensational lead-in graphics. Newspapers, although owned by the same companies, at least give the consumer access to a larger cross section of stories and information in greater detail..
Another adverse component in the issue of cross ownership and speed of information is the relaxing of standards. The recent development at CBS, formerly the “gold standard” for the news media, is a most glaring example of this relaxation. Checking and re-checking sources should never be considered less important than sensational reporting no matter what the subject. The media have allowed sensational graphics, obviously biased anchormen, and the desire to get a story out to the public as fast as possible overshadow the importance of thorough and accurate news gathering.
Because of these existing failures it is the consumer’s responsibility to research where their information originates. Questions must now be asked; the consumer must now become more involved in news gathering than ever before. The audience must now become the reporter, asking the important questions. Does the source make opposing view points available? In order to make informed decisions and carry on intelligent debates, both sides of any issue should be known. Absent now, since the days of big company ownership, are the opposing views that our parents and grandparents were privy to. Due to this lack of information the publics’ view on any one issue can become slanted.
In whose point of view is the story being told? Knowing only how a large corporation is affected by an event is only half the story. Unless the views of the laborers and the surrounding community are known, it is virtually impossible to understand the full effect of the event. The ability for cross ownership is partially to blame for this all too common occurrence of stories being told in the view of the large corporations. It is imperative to know the possible links between the company that owns the media source and the corporate interests in the story being reported.
Is there diversity among the available panel of experts? A story focusing on the issues pertaining to Hispanics and their community should not be discussed by an all white, all female panel. If an expert panel is discussing politics, an attempt should be made to include as many different party representatives as possible. It is also important to note whether the expert is actually an authority in the field that is being discussed.
Another question to be asked is whether the news outlet uses stereotypes when discussing an issue, or uses pictures and graphics that misrepresent the story. For example, when discussing welfare the focus should not be on African-American women since the welfare system serves people of all races. Care must be made that these stereotypes don’t become accepted facts. It is fairly common to see pictures that do not match articles or graphics that tell half the story
Yes, questions must be asked. No longer is it acceptable for the public to sit idly by and absorb information from one source. Consumers must learn to be informed participants in the dissemination of news. News and newspapers were intended to be participatory from the outset, and this fact makes it inseparable from the democratic process. The public must get involved, make informed choices, and research as much information as possible. As consumers the demand for diversity, lack of stereotypes, and availability of opposing views must be insisted upon.
# posted by Tori @ 8:04 PM 
