Mass Media

• The mass media has greatly overstepped its bounds.
The mass media has used its position to sway the minds of the citizens. They often present information as if it were a fact when it is simply an opinion. This has been used quite often to spread liberal propaganda.
Yes LimpingMurray93
• Yes, the media over steps its own boundaries and stomps on the freedoms of others in its quest for higher ratings and more circulation.
The mass media market is not about hard-hitting news anymore. It is about whatever gets them the most ratings and makes the most money. Because of this, news reporters are horrible at violating the rights of celebrities and other influential people, just to get some dirt on their lives. Worst of all, said celebrities have very few rights to defend themselves with, and more than one photographer has sued the person he was stalking for damages when the celebrity tried to fight back and break their camera, or something along those lines. The media market is a bunch of obsessive stalkers that the law ignores.
Yes H_Baird
• Yes. I believe that privacy is a human right, and the media continuously violates that right.
One example would be the paparazzi chasing down celebrities in some of the most private moments of their lives. Regardless of social status, as human beings, we deserve some form of privacy. The need for society to have knowledge about a total stranger's personal business is not valid. People do not need to know everything about everyone. On a more relevant level, court hearings are a way for the media to involve the public in a situation that should remain private, as publicity can affect peoples opinions, and sometime the outcome of a case. This is not just.
Yes R3gg43Wit
• Yes, the media has become obsessed with invading celebrity's privacy and going too far in general.
The mass media seems to overstep its boundaries constantly nowadays. This trend is seen the most with how the paparazzi invades celebrities' lives and cannot respect people's space. Also the increase in reality TV has made everyone think they can be a part of the media, which blurs the lines of what the public thinks is public versus private.
Yes VincenzoB
• The mass media oversteps it's boundaries by consistently taking sides in political debates.
I believe that the role of mass media is to provide fact-based news to the masses. Too often mass media presents opinion pieces in which they discuss what is right and wrong. Typically, these pieces are presented as opinion pieces, but their prevalence leads many to assume it's the stance of the news organization. At the very least, it can influence the public's opinion too easily. Mass media should report the news without opinions and let the public make up their own mind.
Yes IarsChrome
• Yes, I agree that mass media sometimes go beyond its boundaries. There are many many instances these days.
Mass Media carries some social responsibility, it should enable communication informing people responsibly with the factual knowledge without any kind of bias. These days, sometimes we can find many instances where in mass media had exceeded its boundaries providing information based on rumor or too much information or sometimes irrelevant information as well.
Yes SaroM0vi3
• The mass media absolutely oversteps its boundaries; they cause car crashes and instigate physical fights with celebrities.
To see how the media oversteps its boundaries, you only need to look at the fatal car crash caused by paparazzi photographers when Princess Diana died, or the tasteless photos of Michael Jackson's corpse. Every single detail about someone's personal life is parlayed into a two-page spread of photos - who they're sleeping with, who they're cheating with, a nudity slip, even articles judging celebrities' toddlers/children and their dress sense or weight! I am far too young for this, but there was a time period where actors didn't have a camera or a microphone in their face every minute of every day, and that mystery made them almost chameleon-like in their roles. At a premiere or awards show there are thousands of photographers clamoring to get a photo with large, oversized, frightening-looking cameras. That would be terrifying for small children, and it should be scaled back.
Yes R053Neddy
• Yes, I believe that the mass media goes way too far on many occasions.
I have personally witnessed outright lies from the media just to make a better story. Case in point- my best friend died December 25th, 2007. She fell off of a roof on Christmas morning. The media made her out to be an alcoholic and tried to use her story to scare young people not to drink. The truth was, there was no alcohol in her system. She was cold and had a blanket wrapped around her. She fell asleep looking at the stars and when she woke up, her feet got tangled in the sheets. The media outright lied to push their own personal agenda and tarnished her name forever.
Yes I33Horray
Voice Your Opinion
No
50% of users
• The mass media's primary goal is to make profit, so there are no boundaries to overstep.
The mass media includes newspapers, T.V., and Internet, among any other mediums that could be found. There are no boundaries to overstep, as these media companies seek to make profit. If one doesn't wish to listen to mass media, then they simply won't. One has the choice to listen or watch what they want, and the media cannot control that.
No TigerAmb
• Mass media does not overstep its boundaries, because it's up to others to enforce their own boundaries.
Sometimes, mass media can seem overly intrusive into people's lives. But, it's up to individuals to take steps to safeguard their privacy. And, if media do cross lines, then we always have the rights to contact law enforcement and pursue court action against them. If the media never pushed a little, they'd never get to the bottom of anything.
No FlakyHerb64
• I do not think the mass media oversteps their boundaries, for many reasons.
I do not think the mass media oversteps their boundaries, for many reasons. First off, there is the freedom of speech factor. Mass media is usually run by citizens who want to portray their side of an issue or product. Second, people, in general, crave knowledge. This is where the mass media produces the knowledge and news coverage we need right away.
No SecondNoel50
• I think the media has the right and obligation to report on a wide variety of things.
Public figures who argue that the "lame stream" media oversteps its bounds are the same people whose actions most need to be publicised. For instance, Sarah Palin often accuses the media of being overly invasive, but the media's job is to expose potential leaders and other public figures for what and who they really are.
No ClammyErwin38
• Mass media does not overstep their boundaries, because they are just filling a demand in the market that has become part of our culture.
I don't believe that mass media oversteps their boundaries, because the demand is so high for constant coverage of everything. We have become so used to having 24-hour news channels and access to things once considered private, that mass media has become a demand and an expectation. If people begin to stop watching and buying into it, then the demand will go away. But, for now, we are so used to being able to get information about anything we want at any time of the day, and that is due to the efforts of the mass media. And, I actually see it getting bigger and bigger, as our thirst for information grows.
No SilentIgnacio
• No, I think the mass media oversteps the bounds of decency sometimes, but not any legal boundaries.
While it's easy to hate the way mass media covers events and non-events, celebs and otherwise, I still wouldn't advocate censorship. The best way to censor media is for the public to stop paying attention. I wouldn't want limits imposed on reporters beyond the Constitutional prohibition on libel.
No Th4Fire
• Mass Media does not overstep its boundaries, it falls under freedom of speech.
As long as people are allowed to make decisions of whether to subject themselves to mass media or not, then mass media will never overstep its boundaries. Mass media targets those who it wishes to reach in most cases, and those groups are generally the same people who wish to be reached. Regardless, if the viewer has a choice to listen or not, then freedom of speech is in effect.
No T3ddDemon
• The American mass media does not overstep its' boundaries.
America is a democracy. Democracies require a well-informed populace. The people are the masters of the machine, in a true democracy. The founders understood this. Therefore, they gave our press (i.e. mass media) privileges. They have the responsibility (i.e. a duty) to live up to the special power and privilege that has been allotted to them. Our media does not live up to their mandate. A recent example is the health care debate. We had numerous articles and broadcasts that worked to enrage us or to pull on our heart strings. It was nearly impossible to find an article or a news story that detailed any of the proposals in any of the bills. We were being asked our feelings about bills, without ever being told what was in them. It should not be necessary, in a real democracy, for the populace to sit in on every legislative act, sit in every court room in this country, or personally audit every government official. This is the duty of the mass media. They are given the power to investigate and report, in order to provide us with the information we need. They do not go far enough.