Today, I wanted to comment on the power of the media not to collude with the government, but to bring down politicians. In the above article New York Republican gubernatorial candidate Carl Paladino attacked homosexuals. His speech was made only to a small gathering, but thanks to the ever present media his remarks can be read and commented on by a huge number of people. While people may see the media as a tool of big government, it is also a perpetual watchdog. Anytime a conservative misspeaks or makes a bigoted comment, CNN or MSNBC is there to let everyone know it happened. Likewise, FOX news helps to balance the equation by sharply observing liberals. Sarah Palin’s run for vice-president was seriously hurt because she said dumb things that were widely propagated by the media. Outside of mass media, sites like youtube allow anyone to similarly distribute politicians and powerful people saying foolish or unwise things. Which one do you think is more effective at challenging the powerful, the mainstream news outlets, or individuals with the power of the internet? Should politicians always be observed to figure out their true beliefs (homophobic in this case) or is that an invasion of privacy?
Here’s a video on youtube of George Bush
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqLvBUSJucg
I think that can be both a good and bad thing. It is good that news can travel fast and people can be exposed for obvious wrong doings. However, I think Sarah Palin is a great example of how media can really hurt someone. I wasn't exactly a big fan of hers from the start. But after the media got ahold of her, I just started feeling sorry for her. They absolutely destroyed her. And then after ruining her, a guy writing a book on her moved in next door to better observe her. Not to mention the reports on her family. Don't get me wrong, I think lies and corruption should definitely be reported on as well as important information to inform voters on who they are really voting for (like homophobic comments). But sometimes the media crosses the line and just needs to leave people alone.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion I really dont think any of them can challenge mainstream media outlets. I say this because of sheer numbers. A person really has to make an effort go onto youtube and look for something specific. On the contrary you have the news playing 24/7. By surfing channels you are more likely to run into this media.
ReplyDeleteHaha! Funny Bush Bloopers Reel. I definitely would agree with your position that the media definitely has the power to hurt the reputation of politicians. I'm going to take it a step further though and say, I think the media's really the only source that can attack the reputation of politicians. Unless something is spread through word of mouth, I can't think of a way other than media where someone is going to get a bad name.
ReplyDeletePoliticians are still operating like we don't live in a 24 hour news cycle.
ReplyDeleteRegarding your proposal, I think it would neat to touch on all the different justice issues portrayed/highlighted in the film. This would be number one but would include some of the other questions you mentioned. For example, the use of social constructs to manipulate info easily falls under "concepts of justice."
ReplyDeleteActually, all of your ideas were good so I'm just trying to help you narrow down the topic..