The media loves to stir up controversy. Sensationalism and outrageous ideas help with the ratings and ad revenues, but that doesn’t do much to educate the public.
Jay Smooth asks whether it’s too much to ask of the media to not feed the trolls?
Tag Archive for 'journalism'
Who hasn’t been following the back and forth between Stewart and MSNBC/Cramer this week?
Thursday night, Cramer voluntarily took part in a lengthy dialogue with Stewart about the culpability of the financial media in the economic meltdown.
I blog at wordpress.com, which means I can’t embed flash, sooooo I have to send you away to The Daily Show to view the unusually lengthy interview. Pundits and commentators will hopefully be talking about this interview today like adults, not snarky adolescents.
Go here, and bask in the glory of real journalism disguised as pseudo-journalism. Like a pit bull, when the interview gets uncomfortable, Stewart wouldn’t let go.
Ask yourselves why people who claim to report “real news,” don’t go in for the kill like that and do their job. Based on the failing economic models of newspapers, it seems pandering to advertisers (not writing too negatively about the companies that ante up) might not be the way to go. I’d buy a paper that went for the jugular and did some real investigative reporting. But maybe that’s just me wanting to stick it to corporate America. Would you?
PS. For the record, I’d like to be adopted by Jon Stewart and Rachel Maddow. How cool are they?
Historically, it could be argued that all forms of journalism lack objectivity. When mass printings became less cost prohibitive, newspapers were born and were first made available to the affluent. Publishers quickly realized that profit was to be had, not in subscriptions, but in advertising sales. Accordingly, the capturing and keeping the attention of a desirable demographic meant a steady stream of advertising dollars. From the get go, there were a variety of foci for papers from high brow to the sensational which caught the interest of different segments of society.
The editorial shaping of news drew in an audience of like-thinkers. People seek out other people and resources that reiterate their own beliefs. Thus, journalism is inherently biased given its history. And the shift from newspaper to television just made shaping the big story that much more costly and risky. A greater number of eyeballs are requirement to make televised media work (print news survives on a much tighter budget) so a much more common denominator must be found, but there’s still a bias present in terms of what stories are told and from what angle.
Ultimately, media companies are beholden to their advertisers. Yes, companies want to reach consumers, but they’re not going to bring revenue to media conglomerates that are hostile to their industry. Company X isn’t going to support the production of news pieces (via ad coin) that may be detrimental to their own bottom line. So an oil company’s culpability in the destruction of the Amazon or a class action law suit against a big box chain for its systematic discrimination against women probably won’t be the lead news item in print or on TV, The news is colored to balance the ideology of viewers with the bottom line interests of advertisers.
In an election year, I have to wonder how much of the Presidential race we really get to see. As someone who seeks out news media with a very liberal bias, I, no doubt, am only getting one piece of the story. When watching more centrist news nibbles, I wonder where the coverage of McCain’s incessant flip flopping is (his positions seem to change daily based on his audience, and he either is oblivious or doesn’t care the the internet makes stringing his constantly renegotiated positions together a relatively simple feat) or his complete disregard for differences between sects in Iraqi culture (Will Joe Lieberman be McCain’s permanent cultural attache?).
While media harps on whether or not Michelle Obama is proud of her country, few main stream sources seem to point that McCain A) recently commented that it’s sometimes “tough” to be proud of America and B) until he was a POW, he didn’t love America. Seems like those comments, in fairness to Mrs. Obama, should be looped over and over again at prime time for several nights. Haven’t we heard, for what seems like months, that Obama has a problem with women voters, especially angry Clintonistas? And yet he’s taking a 19-point lead with women over McCain. When Republican women are exposed to the no-longer-the-maverick McCain’s anti-feminist and anti-choice positions on abortion, family planning, and pay discrimination in the work place, many reconsider who they plan to vote for in November.
And I’m sure if you have conservative leanings in your media consumption, you could likely list off a variety of Obama gaffes in his own speaking (such as his reference to well more than 50 US states). Wouldn’t it be great to put both candidates on one of the sundry trivia game shows? Senators Obama and McCain, Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader?
Joking aside, where is the story coming from? And why? Clinton lost her shot at the primary many weeks before the media began discussing the impossibility of the delegate math. Yet, her constant moving of the candidacy goal posts was accommodated. (A neck and neck, prolonged primary season means more eyes glued to the news and more ad pricing at a premium. McCain is still dubbed a “maverick” despite siding with President Bush’s positions 95% of the time. Obama, as the media would have it, is practically the second coming of Jesus Christ. Who’s controlling the story, and what are the ulterior motives?
Murdoch admitted, sans hesitation, he was behind the New York Post’s endorsement of Barack Obama. It would be naive to think other media conglomerates didn’t experience the same behind the scenes maneuvering. Evidence doesn’t seem to be pointing to a neck and neck nail biter this November, what with Obama’s 15 point bump in a recent poll, but you couldn’t tell by main stream media.
Conspiracy theorists have long conjectured that the “men in dark suits” control the trajectory of the world. I’m more concerned with corporate interests that don’t have citizens’ best interests at heart.
This video made me wonder: when men are referred to in the pejorative in media? It seems that that while society is rife with acceptable slurs for women, men are rarely frowned upon because of their nature or inappropriate behavior. In “sex scandal” after “sex scandal” the politician stands in front of the media with his wife in tow, apologizing for his lapse in judgment before emphasizing how much he loves his family; meanwhile the woman he paid is vilified for her prostitution in the media and then by the courts.
In the indie film Amy’s Orgasm (the title is far more salacious than the film), lead Amy sits down with shock jock Matt to discuss her best selling book. Despite their flirtatious banter, she reminds him, “slut, tramp, whore. Those are all words that would describe you if you were a woman. But you’re not. You’re a man; you’re a stud. I don’t date studs.” All of the nouns to describe a promiscuous woman have negative connotations, but for men, being a player is practically cause for celebration in their social circles.
Sexism has also had a role in the 2008 Presidential campaign. Blog Shakesville has documented 103 instances of sexism in the coverage of Hilary Clinton thus far. A CNN political commentator found himself in hotwater when he said some women deserve to be called a bitch, which by his definition seems to include aggressive, forceful women. . . in men that would be demonstrating traditional leadership skills and their ambitious.
As of 2006, women made up 50.7% of the US population, so if we’re offended by what we’re seeing, wouldn’t we “vote” to oust such negative stereotypes by choosing to consume different media? One of the main reasons we don’t see more uproar over the unbalanced coverage of women is ignorance. We’d have to recognize that the behavior is inappropriate, rather than the norm, in the first place.
Let me digress to a personal anecdote. In high school I reported being harassed by a group of male students in the hallways and in my chemistry class. Guidance had to have a few words with the guys, and the inappropriate behavior quelled, which was my goal. To my complete shock, a fellow classmate approached me in the hall to inform me that I was wrong to report the issue. “We’re women; we have to put up with it.”
Sorry, I have to disagree; what we do not denounce, we encourage and the latest studies on sexual harassment show another generation of girls growing up believing derrogatory remarks related to their gender to be the norm. Teen self-esteem expert Courtney Macavinta recently blogged about a new UC Santa Cruz study that found 9 in 10 girls between the ages of 12-18 report at least once experience of harassment at school including
**receiving inappropriate and unwanted romantic attention, hearing demeaning gender-related comments
**being teased about appearance
**receiving unwanted physical contact
**being teased, bullied, or threatened with harm by a male
The study points out that
Moreover, girls who had learned about feminism through the media or from people in their lives, including mothers and teachers, were more likely to recognize it than girls who had never heard about feminism, and girls who felt pressure from parents to conform to gender stereotypes perceived more sexism than other girls
You have to be able to identify a problem to call it out and demand change. Much like we’ve been desensitized to violence through TV, film, and video games; the same can be said of sexism and misogyny. Children are still in a culture that supports misogyny; at some point we have to break the cycle and stand up for equality, not just in women’s represenation in media, but for women in society in general.
Media that objectifies women and uses derogatory gender specific terminology reinforces language and ideology that denies women equal status. Judgement-neutral terminology should be the only acceptable language choice in so-called objective journalism, which is clearly, based on the above video, not the standard.
And it wouldn’t hurt if entertainment celebrated and multiplied strong female protagonists, instead of wondering why we need them.
Recent Comments