Public Opinion of Mass Media

Public Opinion of Mass Media

presentation

One of media's biggest problems in presenting stories is just what gets presented. Obviously, there are billions of things occurring all over the world every second of the day, and one can not hope to inform the general public about each event. So what gets picked?
Usually, things of national importance, of great social importance or of universal interest make the best news stories or fodder for entertainment. But many people have their own ideas of how well media does this part of its job, as evidenced by this excerpt from a Deja.com newsgroup:

"Isn't it funny how human life is pigeonholed and categorized, so that somehow snuffing out one life is less or more important because of political and media considerations?? What difference does it make what the intent was, when any innocent person is killed? Why does the media make the public feel that the death of one person is more outrageous than that of someone else, when both people are equally MURDERED and equally DEAD?????? The liberal media promotes only liberal causes and ignores any story that might disprove their cause."

bias

There is also the dilemma of bias. Does media involvement cloud issues, making them worse or more difficult to understand? Often times, yes. The media cannot avoid having its own agenda. An agenda is an all-encompassing method of organization. Many people believe that certain issues are purposely over-exaggered or ignored as they correspond with media support or disapproval with current events. In another newsgroup posting, one man sums this up with the following example:

    "Um, your use of the word "exploitation" is one of the many problems with the bias in the media especially concerning 'gay' deaths, 'race' deaths, school shootings, etc.. The socialist liberal media has definitely EXPLOITED all of them but when a story comes along like this story (two gays rape and murder a young boy) that doesn't fit their agenda it's not given anywhere near the coverage of those that do. If the two guys had been members of any non-PC group (Republicans, conservatives, etc.) the story would have been exploited for all it's worth - no doubt about it. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a complete fool.
     There have been several instances in the past year of gun-carrying citizens stopping mass murders before they got out of hand but THOSE aren't reported for weeks and months in the news like the PC crimes by the same socialist media elitists who whine about the stories that DO fit their agenda.
    Ask twenty people in any city in the country, outside of Arkansas or Oklahoma, and the chances are good that only 2 or 3 have heard of the story. There IS media bias in this country and those who say there is not is a part of the problem.
    BTW, it's also interesting to note that the rash of school shootings that this country has experienced have ALL occurred during billy boy's presidency. If they had occurred during Reagan or Bush, or any other Republican, the media would mention this fact on a daily basis."

The question of what is ethical in all this arises when people attempt to decide whether there is even anything wrong with being biased.

Link here for information on different ideas of media morality.

Link here for information on the responsibilities of mass media.

Back to Homepage