In POS2001, I learned the mass media reports on bad news more than good. This draws more viewers and overall makes the station more money. Every time I sit down to watch the news, I see car bombings, people being blown away, women and children dying, stories spun against Bush. Shortly after 9/11, there were more politicans and Americans alike in favor of the war on terror. As the war progressed, more and more are against it. I am wondering if all of this negitave media has played a role in the oppostiton of the war? If there were bits about the progress being made in Iraq, would the president's approval ratings be higher and would more Americans be in favor of the war?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I believe it would make a major difference. Most people in America get their information from the t.v. media, so whatever they say most people believe. If all anyone hears is bad things about Iraq and the President, then they are going to believe nothing but bad things are going on. The media doesnt care about the status of the President or trying to increase support for the war, they just want to make as much money as possible. That is when it comes down to the people of the U.S. to inform and educate themselves.
Which came first the chicken or the egg?
Did the media feed it to us as negative, or did people actually start to come out of the original daze and anger and realize we were on our way to doing some stuff that could be really f----- up?
I agree that people point the finger at media too quickly though. I mean, seriously just go look at a bunch of sources and learn things for yourself if you want 'more accurate' oppinions.
>If there were bits about the progress being made in Iraq, would the president's approval ratings be higher and would more Americans be in favor of the war?
In anything there are always some positive aspects, but the concern is are we making enough progress in relation to the cost in money and lives.
>The media doesnt care about the status of the President or trying to increase support for the war,
Nor should they. The purpose of the media is to report the news, not to promote any particular agenda, whether it be the president, the war, liberals, conservatives, etc.
I once again believe the minds of people are being warped. Do they truly choose not to display good news? If a child walks to school and survives this is good news yet it doesn't make it to our local news station. If this same child were hit by a car this is bad news and it would make it to our news station. Now wait a minute there is a third scenario, had the child managed to evade an oncoming car this is good news and would be aired. No one wants to here an everyday type of news we won't something that is a little bit out of the ordinary whether it be good or bad. In most cases I would think this would be bad since the chances of a child getting hit by the vehicle would be greater than the chances of him being able to narrowly escape it.
Like Mr. Q said, don't believe for a minute that the media gives a damn about the President, or anyone else it reports on, it is strictly about ratings, but thats the way it goes with TV. Of course negative media plays a role in the war's opposition, as a different side is portayed, and it seems that there is much more negative to say than positive. The Eagles had a song about the media called "Dirty Laundry."
I don't have a "bluemeanie" in my gradebook, so I can't give you credit for these posts unless you go back to each individual post an add your name.
Like Mr. Q said, don't believe for a minute that the media gives a damn about the President, or anyone else it reports on, it is strictly about ratings, but thats the way it goes with TV. Of course negative media plays a role in the war's opposition, as a different side is portayed, and it seems that there is much more negative to say than positive. The Eagles had a song about the media called "Dirty Laundry."
Post a Comment