The Impact of Media on Uneducated Masses
In the United States or any country with favorable or democratic
government, freedom of the media is essential. However, many analysts
believe that freedom granted to the media gives it power that may be used
abusively, power to influence the public. These critics are against a sort
of, "Lesse-fairre" attitude of the government towards the media. At the
other end of the table however, some feel that freedom given to the media
may go unchecked, for it is the people that influence the media and control
that power. Perhaps the truth lies somewhere in between...
James Hallow attempts to approach this issue in his work "Why
Americans Hate the Media". In this text Hallows examines the evolution of
the media and its relationship to the public it caters to. In the thirties,
media mimicked sleepytime Sunday morning political debates that one would
watch on the public access channel. They, in many ways were considered
"boring." Networks were growing more interested in attracting their
audiences. As the years advanced and technology followed, media began
taking different approaches to arouse the public. Conflicts on television
where seen as a more interesting and productive approach to increasing
ratings. After a while, interviewers would attempt to provoke debate, mud
throwing and even emotion out of it's political guests. Politicians who be
allowed air-time to address questions presented by viewers and interviewers.
One major complaint however, was that the media was more interested in
evoking a response in the interviewed rather than probing issues th at
really mattered to the audiences. They would infact be more interested in
impressing their peers with the questions they asked, rather than being
interested in the answers. They ask questions like "Do you think Mr.
Clinton will be re-elected? How do you plan to handle Newt's new tax
bill?" rather than "How is your
government, freedom of the media is essential. However, many analysts
believe that freedom granted to the media gives it power that may be used
abusively, power to influence the public. These critics are against a sort
of, "Lesse-fairre" attitude of the government towards the media. At the
other end of the table however, some feel that freedom given to the media
may go unchecked, for it is the people that influence the media and control
that power. Perhaps the truth lies somewhere in between...
James Hallow attempts to approach this issue in his work "Why
Americans Hate the Media". In this text Hallows examines the evolution of
the media and its relationship to the public it caters to. In the thirties,
media mimicked sleepytime Sunday morning political debates that one would
watch on the public access channel. They, in many ways were considered
"boring." Networks were growing more interested in attracting their
audiences. As the years advanced and technology followed, media began
taking different approaches to arouse the public. Conflicts on television
where seen as a more interesting and productive approach to increasing
ratings. After a while, interviewers would attempt to provoke debate, mud
throwing and even emotion out of it's political guests. Politicians who be
allowed air-time to address questions presented by viewers and interviewers.
One major complaint however, was that the media was more interested in
evoking a response in the interviewed rather than probing issues th at
really mattered to the audiences. They would infact be more interested in
impressing their peers with the questions they asked, rather than being
interested in the answers. They ask questions like "Do you think Mr.
Clinton will be re-elected? How do you plan to handle Newt's new tax
bill?" rather than "How is your