In class, another student brought up that news is a business, and I believe that we cannot discount the media as businesses. Ideologies have become very important recently but have not edged out earnings (translated by viewership) as the main motivation of media outlets. They operate on fear and sensationalism for a reason: we tune in for it. At the same time, I see that most people are sincerely disillusioned with the media. So, why aren't more people watching the PBS Newshour or BBC News America? The same question could be asked of internet news: how many people have their homepage set to the Associated Press vs. MSN or Yahoo? Why, when there are less sensationalized alternatives, do the majority of us (myself included--I'm not throwing stones.) stick to network, cable, and entertainment news? I can only assume that we cherry pick by taking what we do want from what the media has to offer. I may want to hear the news plus which movies are debuting this week while my husband wants to hear who won the big game. We sit through what we feel to be the minutia in between while waiting, but the net result is that CNN stays on for the entire hour. So since media is a business and niche stories and sensationalism get a variety of viewers in a very competitive marketplace, can the Habermas ideal public sphere really exist? What about non-profit news outlets? Maybe that would work. Well, we have those, mostly on radio, but how many of us actually tune in to NPR? We could mandate news outlets to be non-profit. If that were the only option for news, then would we tune in? Would we then ban traditional media outlets from reporting what is deemed to be news? Who would decide what qualifies as news? Hmmmmm...
No comments:
Post a Comment