The Big, The Bad, The Ugly: The Media

They call it the "Information Age."

I'm guessing this is someone's coined cute quote rather than an official label, but isn't that how all labels start? Somewhere back there? Like the "Law of Thermodynamics?" Maybe not.

What is the Media?

"Media" as I am sure you, the well-informed, exquisitely educated blogsmith (now how's that for coining?) that you are, know, is simply the plural for "medium." Thus our concept of "Media," signified by reporters running about with pads of paper and cameras uses the language of one who would transmit something, or bring something to someone else. It's kind of like we call them "Vehicles" or "Bicycles." The News Bicycles. The Media.

But I'll say right off that I don't buy it. No sir. They are more than a Vehicle, than a Medium. Perhaps over the next several posts, I want to show why I believe the majority of mass Media completely ineffective for proper mass communication. Maybe "ineffective" is a bad word. It may be more accurate to say that I think what the majority of "Media" are today are not even capable of delivering truth to citizens of the world.

It's in all fairness to say that they are by necessity more than simply a Medium. First off, they have to select. They have to pick some "news" over other news. Also, they are also by necessity human. They think and act and speak and are subject to the same laws of subjectivity and error as other humans. By being human, they are also part of a particular meta-culture(a word which i use simply to distinguish over-arching culture e.g. worldviews, religions, etc. with more specific culture, democrat, liberal, hippie, etc.), chronologically placed within that culture, and part of a several subcultures that are both in reaction against and subject to themselves and the meta-culture.

I could go on, but there's more than enough here to deal with. Let's take the first one. What governs the selection process of the Media? What makes an editor choose "film A" over "film B?"

Time is certainly a factor. Some programs are a mere thirty minutes. Subtract maybe 10 of those minutes (i'm being generous) for commercials, and you're left with 20 to describe the news of the entire world. But that's just television, you say. There are other forms of Media-- after all, you've just told us it's the plural for medium. Indeed I did. And indeed there are other forms. What about Newspapers? Newspapers have a deadline of one day, for most articles. Radio programs have time constraints. I know there are exceptions, but I know also that the issue remains; keeping a program short enough for modern listeners and/or readers is more important than developing a well-informed program.

Money rules the world. What buys newspapers? What pays for television programming? What makes advertisers want to advertise during your show? I know we've all seen some stirring Hollywood blockbusters about noble journalists who fight for people's rights and who "just want the truth" and all that, but, well, as usual, Hollywood speaks for itself. Papers, magazines, and television have to sell a product. It's that simple. You don't sell the news, you go off the air. Sometimes lies sell more than truth. You don't think it happens? The Media take oaths in college to uphold ethical standards when reporting and editing? Not quite. Or if they do they're not working.

Thus selection follows, not truth and justice, but the dollar. The big fat American dollar. Selection occurs when time is of the essence and the exact story isn't.

Next time: Mass Media and Truth: A Theory of Reconciliation