Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Impacts of mass media in politics
Impacts of mass media in politics
The role of mass media in politics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
As the times change, so does the latest technology. In the mid-1900's it was the television, before that the radio, and now in the late-20th and 21st century we have the internet. With the coming of every new media outlet audiences and media moguls migrate. Along with the migrations are the politicians who try to use the new form of media to more easily reach the public. It's come to the point where the internet increasingly work with democracy directly; some elections in the United States even going so far as to hold online polling in a general election. "Online voting is increasingly making its way int our political process," writes Vote.com President Dick Morris, "the 2000 Arizona Democratic Primary tallied 39,942 online votes," (Morris 1034). However, should the internet really be used to such degrees in the case of democracy? There is an ongoing debate among scholars on the topic. One thing to consider is whether or not the many accusations stating that the internet is an aid to terrorism outweigh the positive effects of how the internet has strengthened democracy and has had a crucial part in turning oppressed nations into less oppressed, democratic states. On the subject of terrorism being aided by the internet, making it easier for terrorist factions leaders to inform their people, could it not be argued that these factions leaders could use other means of communication, maybe only a little less effectively and therefore nullifying the accusation that the internet is the culprit? After extensive research, it's clear that the internet does not harm democracy; on the contrary, the internet strengthens it in a way that no other form of media has done before.
In their book "Democracy and the Internet: Allies or Adversaries...
... middle of paper ...
...ly that forces up advertising costs," (Morris 13). Scholars believe that "just as radio advertising has fallen out of favor as the prime means of political communication... so too will television be forced from its central place on campaign budgets," and the internet will be the main source of campaign advertising (Morris 13). The internet is incredibly inexpensive because "anyone can start a website [and it is] difficult to command top dollar for internet advertising." (Morris 13). Once this advertising migration takes place, so will federal spending budgets due to the inexpensiveness of internet advertising. One can extrapolate this change in events, speculating that less campaign money and a lower federal budget could mean either keeping the tax rate as it is and then, in turn, spending the money in various other sectors that need funding, or a lowering of taxes.
In conclusion, Carr and Gladwell’s essays have proven that the internet positive effects are outweighed by its negative effects. Carr has found he is unable to finish a full text anymore or concentrate. He thinks that the internet has taken our natural intelligence and turned it into artificial intelligence. Gladwell discusses how nowadays, social activism doesn’t have the same risk or impact as former revolutions such as the Civil Rights Movement. The internet is mostly based on weak ties based among people who do not truly know each other and would not risk their lives for their
The author is this article is Kalev Leetaru, he is known as an American internet entrepreneur and academic. He is also a contributor to Foreign Policy, where he discusses current political events worldwide. He was appointed adjunct assistant professor at Georgetown university which is ranked #6 internationally and is an extremely well respected university in Washington DC.
It is very common among the United States’ political sphere to rely heavily on T.V. commercials during election season; this is after all the most effective way to spread a message to millions of voters in order to gain their support. The presidential election of 2008 was not the exception; candidates and interest groups spent 2.6 billion dollars on advertising that year from which 2 billion were used exclusively for broadcast television (Seelye 2008.) Although the effectiveness of these advertisements is relatively small compared to the money spent on them (Liasson 2012), it is important for American voters to think critically about the information and arguments presented by these ads. An analysis of the rhetoric in four of the political campaign commercials of the 2008 presidential election reveals the different informal fallacies utilized to gain support for one of the candidates or misguide the public about the opposing candidate.
Fog, A. (2004, May 4). The supposed and the real role of mass media in modern democracy. Retrieved from Agner.org: www.agner.org/cultsel/mediacrisis.pdf
As this critical juncture begins to take place, there has been much debate between scholars as to whether we should be enthusiastic or wary of these new changes. In Digital Disconnect and in his lectures, McChesney observes both views in an attempt to advance the discussion. On one side, the celebrants are embracing the Internet as a medium that will change society for the better. In Digital Disconnect, McChesney says, “In sum, the celebrants reaffirm one of the most important original arguments from the 1990s, that the Internet will be a force for democracy and good worldwide, ending monopolies of information and centralized control over communication” (McChesney 8). In my opinion, this celebrant view should only be regarded as a best-case scenario because of the unexpected obstacles for society that can...
place. It should be left up to the users to decide what is broadcast. Most
Howard, P. N., & Hussain, M. M. (2011). The role of digital media. Journal of Democracy, 22(3), 35-
“If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.” - George Washington. Freedom of speech is one of the universal declarations of human right, created on the 10th of December 1948. It is the complete opposite of what censorship of the internet entails. “This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by a public authority and regardless of frontiers.” Censorship of the internet not only goes directly against this, but it prevents a free flow of information, our ability to communicate as a society and places governments in control of our rights of expression.
George Bernard Shaw once said, “The first condition of progress is the removal of censorship.” Internet censorship is the control or suppression of what can be accessed, published, or viewed on the Internet. In other words, one day you might not be able to Google everything you want to know as you can now. Although the Internet can be a dangerous without caution, countries need not to censor the Internet for their own selfish reasons. Internet censorship is a form of a dictatorship, and they can cause riots as well as take away our first amendment right.
The internet has been one of the most influential technological advancements of the twenty-first century. It is in millions of homes, schools, and workplaces. The internet offers not only a way of communicating with people around the world, but also a link to information, shopping, chatting, searching, and maps. This freedom to be anyone and to "go" anywhere right from the comfort of home has become a cherished item. However, there is always a down side to every up. Because of the freedom to post anything and access anything on the internet, the issue of regulation has arisen; for example, what should and should not be allowed on the internet? Who has the right to regulate this space that we cherish for its freedom?
Social media including Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Youtube, Flicker, internet websites, and blogs are becoming mainstream attracting a younger more technology savvy voter. Many candidates in the last elections learned to use these mediums so not to overlook tech savvy voters and learned how to use these to their advantage. Candidates took to the internet to raise awareness, state views, and even successfully raised donations. Social media was able to provide instant feedback on the standing of a candidate often days or weeks sooner than a more traditional poll.
The current role of mass media in politics has definitely played a significant role in how view and react to certain events and issues of the nation. Newspapers, magazines, television and radio are some of the ways information is passed onto many of the citizens. The World Wide Web is also an information superhighway, but not all of the sources on the Internet are credible. Therefore, I will only focus on the main three types of media: written, viewed, and audible, and how they affect whether or not democracy is being upheld in the land of the free. The media includes several different outlets through which people can receive information on politics, such as radio, television, advertising and mailings. When campaigning, politicians spend large quantities of money on media to reach voters, concentrating on voters who are undecided. Politicians may use television commercials, advertisements or mailings to point out potentially negative qualities in their opponents while extolling their own virtues. The media can also influence politics by deciding what news the public needs to hear. Often, there are more potential news stories available to the media than time or space to devote to them, so the media chooses the stories that are the most important and the most sensational for the public to hear. This choice can often be shaped,
Thirty years ago, if I told you that the primary means of communicating and disseminating information would be a series of interconnected computer networks you would of thought I was watching Star Trek or reading a science fiction novel. In 2010, the future of mass media is upon us today; the Internet. The Internet is and will only grow in the future as the primary means of delivering news, information and entertainment to the vast majority of Americans. Mass media as we know it today will take new shape and form in the next few years with the convergence and migration of three legacy mediums (Television, Radio, Newspaper) into one that is based on the Internet and will replace these mediums forever changing the face of journalism, media and politics. In this paper I will attempt to explain the transition of print media to one of the internet, how the shift to an internet based media environment will impact journalism and mass media, and how this migration will benefit society and forever change the dynamic of news and politics.
Internet has been acknowledged as one of the most efficient way to collect and reflect public opinions, for that people with different classes and races can express their opinions with no obstacles in virtual network spaces. People can speak out whatever they want just by typing on the keyboard within a second. Dr. Heather Savigny mentions in her article “Public Opinion, Political Communication and the Internet” that “The expansion of the internet as a new method of communication provides a potential challenge to the primacy of the traditional media and political parties as formers of public opinion” (1). People realized that the power of internet public opinion in the focus on social issues can be used as a weapon to affect government decision-makings. However, does public opinion only brings positive effects?
Democracy is commonly defined as a government of the people, by the people and for the people. Freedom and democracy walk hand in hand. Democracy is only compatible with a free economy. It is completely incompatible with a system that provides for a governing authority with coercive power. We live in a society today where the media plays a pivotal role in how we see the world, and how our opinions are formed, whether it is from what we watch on television or what we gather from newspapers or internet. Media acts as an interface between the common man and the Government. It is a very powerful tool with the ability to make and break the opinion of people. If media tells the public that this picture is being demanded as one