Jive talking
It’s funny to see folks getting all worked up about what is ominously referred to as media bias.
It seems to me that the media have always been biased, and most papers open about their political slant. Almost none are impartial, and too many rely solely on official press releases and thrilling rumour.
The problem with journalism is that it’s considered entertainment (I suspect as much on the inside as out) – the prime goal being to grab the public’s attention and hold it for as long as possible, sell, sell, sell and, with luck, get your face on the tube.
Important stories will be passed over for fear of boring we the dull masses, the space filled instead with something tantalizing and vapid, preferably involving sex, money and/or mayhem. We are so easy to please.
Those who have successfully made the transition from print to televised media tumble quickly into a shtick, typecasting themselves as the big mouth they were hired to be, with dreams of becoming a snide regular… and a star.
Those among the populace who are genuinely hungry for the “facts” do not satisfy themselves with the noisy assault of flashy two-minute bites just before dinner or bedtime.
So there’s no sense in fretting over what Joe Blow is being fed; he’s already made up his mind. It’s all there for the taking and if Joe has taken it, it’s only because he doesn’t want to know.
We may be appalled that caustic slags like Ann Coulter and Mark Steyn have managed elbow their way into the limelight with puerile invectives and blatant misstatements, but it’s only because they’ve known how to best pander to the presiding fever and hunger for raucous distraction. Every country has them, and they’ll not be canonized by history.
You’ll find them one day soon at the bar, loudly reminiscing about their glory days… even though nobody’s listening.
· · • · ·
Comment
- That last bit, about seeing Ann Coulter drunk and reminiscing in a bar… is it wrong that I become giddy and possibly mildly aroused at that thought?
You’ve reminded me of why I don’t generally read today’s political best sellers. I love Al Franken much of the time, don’t get me wrong, but Lies… isn’t going to be remembered 500 years from now. I find that if I stay away from that sort of temporary political bickering, I can keep my eye on the bigger picture and not fret quite so much about the Ann Coulters and Bill O’Reillys of the world. Their time will pass.
— Mapultoid Sep 25, 11:02am # - I agree that Franken’s latest was funny in parts, but by no means a masterpiece.
The only posit that’s stayed with me is that GW Bush is essentially one mean son of a bitch (aka Barbara). It would explain a lot.
— gail Sep 25, 2:02pm # - And isn’t that the essential difference between GHWBush and his son? Some sense of history? Bush Sr. wanted to leave his mark, and being intelligent, was constantly circumspect (interesting how GW makes every other president look more competent by comparison). Some people even said at the time that Bush’s sense of history hampered him. I think a sense of history, past and future, would do GWB Jr. wonders, well, something besides a sense of Biblical history.
— Lily Sep 25, 2:43pm # - Too often we forget that many (if not most) people aren’t in the business we think they are in. Xerox would like us to believe that they are in the business of manufacturing photocopiers, but the buyers of these machines soon discover that Xerox is really in the business of selling ink cartridges. All that cutting-edge research into machinery is just the best way of creating a captive market in which some real profit can be realised.
And so it is with our mass media. The Times is not in the business of delivering news to the people; it’s in the business of delivering an audience to its advertisers. Each newspaper sold is a way to offset the insanely high costs of manufacturing the damn thing, but more than that, it represents a solid datum point, the full set of which is what the publishers are really selling.
I suppose public broadcasters are the exception to prove the rule. Here in the UK the BBC has been roasting over the coals of the Hutton Inquiry. I think the BBC’s schizophrenia can be explained at least in part by the simple fact that it is not in the same business as any of its competitors. No advertising, no government bosses, just an 80-year-old remit to “educate, inform, and entertain” without bias.
I imagine the same is true for all public broadcasters around the world.
— michael Sep 25, 8:58pm # - It’s actually 2:46 p.m. (EST)
I’m young, I have a degree in journalism from UNC and I hate the media. That being said I have a love affair with it … I’m a copy editor at a newspaper … but I can completely understand your sentiments. I hate yellow journalism. I hate sensationalism (I also have an English degree, a la Coleridge.)
I do have political biases when it comes to my daily life … but not my job. I wish aka “journalists” would remember they’re meant to be watchdogs … not lapdogs.
I’m one of the few and the proud … not the many … and I may go down in a blaze of glory … but I have it in my mind to bring legitimacy back to the media. And I’m going to do it … one newspaper at a time.
Ahhh … the passion of youth … I know. Yada, yada, yada. But at least I WANT to try. I will NEVER succomb to the life of a TV media whore. Whew. Just had to rant. Thanks for allowing me to do so.
— abby Sep 29, 3:44pm # - for a searing and passionate analysis of political biases in modern news practices and their effect on political attitudes, see “From Classes to Masses: The Evolution of The Penny Press in Canada and the U.S.” (It’s my MA thesis. Available at the Weldon library at the University of Western Ontario, or on Microfiche at the National Archives in Ottawa.)
Thanks. I so rarely get to mention that tome.
— dlt Sep 30, 9:52am # - “Raucous distraction.” I like that, but you’re almost too kind. I’m especially disgusted tonight, so how about “tidal wave of bullshit”?
:)
— peggy Oct 3, 2:18am #
commenting closed for this article