Gideon V. Wainwright Case Study

In today’s information age, news is spread at lighting speed. News, gossip, sports scores, data can be reached from just about anywhere. Do we have access to too much information? Well the right to be informed in engraved in the constitution under the first amendment. This smorgasbord of news ensures that the people know details about the professional and sometimes even personal lives of elected and selected officials. When the conviction in the Supreme Court’s Gideon v. Wainwright was reversed, news spread across the country and those who were convicted without given the right to legal counsel could petition to have their cases retried as well. The draw back to the information age is the accuracy and usefulness of the information that
we have access to. Is the sourced being checked first. Are there corporate or political interests that are backing the information outlet. Advertising agencies use celebrity personalities to gain trust from their target audiences. Many of the news outlets of today have degraded to what I call “shock news”. They are more interested in getting site visitors to click on interesting sounding headlines only to show an old story or an article with not much information in it. I can tell you more about Donald Trump’s personal life that what he plans on doing politically because this is what the news media decided to focus on. I feel that people need to be very selective of where they chose to get their information. Without some form of filter, we are in danger of receiving bad information, which is no news at all.