One of the readings that captured my attention was Diana C. Mutz's Effects of "In-Your-Face" Television Discourse on Perceptions of a Legitimate Opposition. American news media has interested me since I moved to the country, probably because television of that kind was a complete novelty for me until then. The most striking feature that I noticed before anything else was the rampant partisanship and the complete lack of effort to even disguise it. The media's importance in a country like Pakistan is diminished, since other issues of even great fundamental importance to the well-being of democracy usually dominate discussion. When Governor assassinations are celebrated and the assassins vigorously defended by hordes of Pakistani lawyers public and private, the expectations of televised media and its quality become secondary to a host of other such issues. Once in the United States, however, the importance of the media and the effects of its methods become not only clear but highlighted by the extremeties of television networks themselves and the pattern of discourse it helps maintain amongst the public. Although American entertainment television was widely and easily accessible, the news portion of television was usually a choice between Pakistani networks or the BBC and CNN. Exposure to the partisanship of networks such as Fox News and MSNBC was received, for the most part, through Jon Stewart's Daily Show. Due to this, at least personally, there was an inherent expectation that Stewart's portrayal of such networks was either a caricature or itself a biased take. In this context, it is likely that my surprise and shock that Stewart's clips did not simply choose those instances in the news with the most outrageous presentations ... ... middle of paper ... ...on's transformation of the media has included politicians becoming ever more susceptible to accusations of crossing party lines, and being held accountable for doing so on various networks in front of the millions of Republicans or Democrats watching whose votes they need to continue their careers. Politicians today are exposed to their constituents through the television more than any other medium, and it is on the television that they are most likely to be grilled by a staunchly partisan commentator in the vein of a Rachel Maddow or a Bill O'Reilly. The connection between Washington and the average voter is almost entirely made through the context the televised news media chooses to put it in, explaining the apparent reflection of television news media partisanship around the halls of Congress, the White House and living rooms and dinner tables around the country.
398).It is also stated that news divisions reduced their costs, and raised the entertainment factor of the broadcasts put on air. (p. 400). Secondly, the media determines its sources for stories by putting the best journalists on the case and assign them to areas where news worthy stories just emanates. (p.400). Third, the media decides how to present the news by taking the most controversial or relevant events and compressing them into 30 second sound-bites. (p.402). finally, the authors also explain how the media affects the general public. The authors’ state “The effect of one news story on public opinion may be trivial but the cumulative effect of dozens of news stories may be important. This shows a direct correlation between public opinions and what the media may find “relevant”. (Edwards, Wattenberg, Lineberry, 2015, p.
Comedian Jon Stewart gives a speech on the Daily Show during the “Rally to Restore Sanity/Fear”. He wants the viewers of the Daily Show to realize the difference between the real and fake threats and to take a humorous perspective on most of America’s “problems”. Stewart also emphasizes to his audience not to take every person on the media by his word and not to overreact to everything they hear. He uses metaphors, comparisons, and hypothetical examples to get his point across.
Americans have become so engrossed with the rhetoric of political parties that many are unable have real discussions about “freedom, fairness, equality, opportunity, security, accountability.” (Lakoff p.177) The election of 1828 gave birth to the “professional politician” it demonstrated how “ambivalence” on issues, how image and the right language or narrative can influence voters. Partisanship did increase competition and empower voters to a greater degree, but it has also divided Americans and obstructed communication. As one historian declared the “old hickory” killed the ideal of nonpartisan leadership. (Parsons p.184) For better or for worse American politics were forever be changed in 1828.
In theory, political campaigns are the most important culmination of the democratic debate in American politics. In practice, however, the media shrouds society’s ability to engage in a democratic debate with unenlightening campaign coverage. Because of this, it is difficult—if not impossible—to have educated political discourse in which the whole, factual truth is on display. After years of only seeing the drama of presidential campaigns, the American public has become a misinformed people.
Imagine a world in which presidential debates were not televised, and a person would have to read the newspaper to get all their political news. Just how different would our country be today? Television has a huge effect on American politics. It is often the main source from which people derive their reasoning and opinions from. There is a plethora of news television channels to choose from and gather information from. These channels often run all times of the day. Keeping American citizens up to date on all developing news. Television properly helps U.S citizens vet and get to know the candidate, as well as the candidate's plan.
First, the role of the media is to represent the public and intervene between the public and the government. The media is a mirror, which re...
The aim of this paper is to look at the relationship between the mass media, specifically television, and presidential elections. This paper will focus on the function of television in presidential elections through three main areas: exit polls, presidential debates, and spots. The focus is on television for three reasons. First, television reaches more voters than any other medium. Second, television attracts the greatest part of presidential campaign budgets. Third, television provides the candidates a good opportunity to contact the people directly. A second main theme of this paper is the role of television in presidential elections in terms of representative democracy in the United States.
Bennett (2011) felt that one of the biggest problems with bias in the American media was its “overwhelming tendency to downplay the big social, economic, or political picture in favor of the human trials, tragedies, and triumphs (177).” Shaiko (2008) alluded to the fact that the American news media is “accountable to the corporate conglomerates” and not “to the readers, listeners, and viewers (205).” Probably the most telling quotation of all can be found in Chapter 10 of The News Media: Communicating Pol...
... is too plain to see to ignore. With the preponderance of information available on the Internet, accurate news reporting is literally seconds away from decoding the spin and explaining the actual facts without as much bias as you will see on cable news. While we still rely on cable news for the visual images and constant analyzation of the news, we have built into our heads which channel is left leaning, right leaning or which one is attempting to straddle the grey area of the politically moderate. Unfortunately to the avid and siloed viewer, theses media channels are the foundation of truth that they need to continue on with their affiliations, political beliefs and moral convictions without worrying about having to change their minds - on anything.
One of the fundamental roles of the media in a liberal democracy is to critically scrutinise governmental affairs: that is to act as a watchdog of government to ensure that the government can be held accountable by the public. However, the systematic deregulation of media systems worldwide is diminishing the ability of citizens to meaningfully participate in policymaking process governing the media (McChesney, 2003, p. 126). The relaxation of ownership rules and control, has resulted in a move away from diversity of production to a situation where media ownership is becoming increasing concentrated by just a few predominantly western global conglomerates (M...
The Hidden Relationship Between Government and Media Rather than being a neutral conduit for the communication of information, the U.S. media plays an intricate role in shaping and controlling political opinions. Media is extremely powerful in the sense that without an adequate functioning media, it is virtually impossible for a sophisticated social structure like the U.S. Government to exist. Henceforth, all known sophisticated social structures, have always been dependent upon the media’s ability to socialize. The U.S. government generally exploits the media, often times manipulating the enormous power of the printed word. Ultimately empowering the U.S. government, strengthening it with the ability to determine and control the popular perception of reality.
Television is a vital source from which most Americans receive information. News and media delegates on television have abused theirs powers over society through the airing of appealing news shows that misinform the public. Through literary research and experimentation, it has been proven that people's perception of reality has been altered by the information they receive from such programs. Manipulation, misinterpretation, word arrangement, picture placement and timing are all factors and tricks that play a major role in the case. Research, experimentation, and actual media coverage has pinpointed actual methods used for deceptive advertising. Television influences society in many ways. People are easily swayed to accept a belief that they may not normally have unless expressed on television, since many people think that everything they hear on television is true. This, however, is not always the case. It has been observed that over the past twenty to thirty years, normal social behavior, even actual life roles of men and women and media, regulatory policies have all been altered (Browne 1998). Media has changed with time, along with quality and respectability. Many Americans receive and accept false information that is merely used as an attention grabber that better the show's ratings and popularity. Many magazines and Journal reviews have periodically discussed the "muckraking" that many tabloid shows rely on to draw in their viewers. This involves sensationalizing a story to make it more interesting, therefore increasing the interest of the audience. "Along the way, all sorts of scandalous substance and goofy tricks appear, but not much mystery in the logic," (Garnson 1997). People often know that these shows aim to deceive them, but still accept the information as truth. Many times, people have strong opinions on certain topics. Yet, when they are exposed to the other side of the argument, they may be likely to agree with the opposite view. As Leon Festinger said, "If I chose to do it (or say it), I must believe in it," (Myers 1997). This is an example of Festinger's cognitive dissonance theory, which pertains to acting contrary to our beliefs. Television influences many people to change their original beliefs. It has the viewers think that the majority of other people hold the contrary idea. Once these views are presented, people have the option to hol...
From the beginning days of the printing press to the always evolving internet of present day, the media has greatly evolved and changed over the years. No one can possibly overstate the influential power of the new media of television on the rest of the industry. Television continues to influence the media, which recently an era of comedic television shows that specialize in providing “fake news” has captivated. The groundbreaking The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and its spin-off The Colbert Report have successfully attracted the youth demographic and have become the new era’s leading political news source. By parodying news companies and satirizing the government, “fake news” has affected the media, the government, and its audience in such a way that Bill Moyers has claimed “you simply can’t understand American politics in the new millennium without The Daily Show,” that started it all (PBS).
In the US, mass media plays a significant role in politics. One of the key roles mass media plays in politics includes the airing of the platforms of various politicians. The media influences the view of people on politics and politicians. As the opinion of individuals is affected, the results of the votes are consequently changed (Holden, 2016).
Althusser (1971) explains that, as an ideological state apparatus, media doesn’t use pressure as a way to bind society together under one dominant ideology, but instead uses the will of the people to make them accept the dominant ideology. However, media is also used as a way for people to challenge the dominant ideology. Newspapers, for example, will have articles that openly criticise and oppose the dominant ideology for what it is, whilst at the same time providing perspectives and opinions on different ideologies (such as feminism) that society can believe in. Although these alternate ideological perspectives exist, they are usually overlooked and only ever reach small audiences. Ideology can also help us understand the media because of the way in which it distributes ideology.