One Response to Journalism: A Photographic Negative of Reality

  1. Mister Fusion says:

    Good article and something I have been complaining about for years. HOWEVER, I know what will get my attention. The article may have also overstated the facts.

    In war, there may be skirmishing up and down the line. A hundred soldiers could be killed every night in the skirmishes. Yet if there is a battle where that same number is killed, again, it gets our attention.

    That doesn’t diminish the loss of the individuals. When the specific loss is magnified though, it does become noticeable in its impact. Shock is more thrilling and noteworthy to the masses than is vanilla pudding. Stephan King and company will always be more popular than Dr. Seuss and company. The National Enquirer will sell more than will The Hill.

    When the news media give what we want to know, they are only doing so in order to please their audience. Numbers mean profits. We don’t have a non-profit news gathering organization that can spend the money to truly investigate newsworthy happenings. Even PBS relies on other news gatherers for their feeds while most of their news consists of discussion by opposing experts.

    This is not a sudden new development in journalism. Geeze, advocacy by newspapers has been the primary focus since their inception. Today we live in an era of the most neutral media of all times. In my own personal opinion though, I don’t think it may ever become more neutral or less competitive.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: