Peter Jennings once said, “Whoever controls the media, controls reality.” Since the invention of mainstream media outlets such as the television, internet, or radio, the public has debated the legitimacy of released publishings. Those who are in places of power in the entertainment business tend to cover up the truth by releasing other information, as demonstrated by outlets such as the Fox News Channel at a frequent pace. In a time where everyone is so connected to the media, many people get most of their knowledge about the outside world from the news aired on their televisions. In George Orwell’s fiction novel, 1984, the citizens within his dystopian universe had a rather small view of the world outside of their country. Their closeted …show more content…
They claim that since something is able to on these feeds, it must be valid, otherwise it wouldn’t have permission to be posted. When referring back to people blindly trusting the media because they have no other outlets, the same idea could apply here. The truth is, though, untrue things ARE able to be broadcasted on the Internet or television. The web is essentially an open forum for anyone to say anything, so it is advised that only websites ending in ‘.gov’, ‘.org’, or ‘.edu’ can be fully trusted. Television, however, is a different story. In an online article, Cynthia McKinney explained that while the American media does have a problem with omitting, misinforming, filtering, and over-exaggerating it’s information, it has the legal right to do so. “Courts in the US have ruled on many occasions that freedom of speech also includes the freedom to lie,” McKinney stated. She went on to discuss that some lies aren’t protected by the constitution, like lying under oath or being untruthful to sell a product. Later in the article, she refers to a documentary that she watched where two reporters went in to work for Fox News. After being told several times to lie, the reporters were told by executives of the network that, “The news is what we say it is.” McKinney ends her article by saying it wasn’t a surprise to her that more and more, people are turning to alternative news outlets for more accurate information. Touching back on the executive’s quotes, “The news is what we say it is,” one may notice just how similar it sounds to the Party in 1984 - “‘Who controls the past,’ ran the Party slogan, ‘controls the future: who controls the present controls the past” (44). This quote is explaining the theory of doublethink, a way of reality control enforced by the Party. Apparently, 1984 and the Fox News Channel are very similar in the thought that they hold ultimate control over the
“"Propaganda is as powerful as heroin, it surreptitiously dissolves all capacity to think” by Gil Courtemanche connects to the sad fact of using propaganda as a deadly weapon to feed people with false information and stop them from thinking. George Orwell’s novel, 1984, describes a totalitarian dystopian society where the Party is constantly brainwashing its citizens with information that is beneficial to its own rights. On the opposite side, people are working for the party just like dominated slaves for their masters without knowing what’s going on. But, in order for the party to achieve this goal, they have to use different techniques of propaganda in Oceania to create fear for people so that they can obey the rules. The use of propaganda in the society of 1984 takes away freedom from individuals because of the absence of privacy, thinking and making decisions.
In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, truth and happiness are falsely engineered to create a perfect society; the belief of the World Controllers that stability is the the key to a utopian society actually led to the creation of an anti-utopian society in which loose morals and artificial happiness exist. Huxley uses symbolism, metaphors, and imagery to satirize the possibiliy of an artificial society in the future as well as the “brave new world” itself.
The novel, 1984, written by George Orwell, gives readers an insight to a possible frightening future where one government has complete and definite control of the people. But “control” might not be the term to describe such a rule. The Party dominates every aspect of life. There is not a single thing that is not under the Party’s rule. Feelings, history, language, statistics, and even human nature are submissive to the Party. They corrupt the mind so much that there is no longer a line that separates truth from a lie. Slogans are repeated through telescreens on a daily basis so the people are gradually forced to believe in illogical statements. Upon first glance, it may seem that a 1984 society is not even imaginable in the world we live in currently. But is it really logical to make such an assumption so quickly? Do we know that what we see on the news and read in our history textbooks is completely accurate? The Internet is one of the most powerful technologies our world has, consisting of an insurmountable amount of information, which is not always what it seems. Ultimately, there are so many things that we do not know, some of which is being held a secret from us. Modern day society shockingly has evidence of a transformation into a menacing 1984 society because of similar government actions and abuse of advanced technology.
Aldous Huxley’s novel, Brave New World, showcases a world alternate from ours, a dystopian setting. Where human morals are drastically altered, families, love, history, and art are removed by the government. They used multiple methods to control the people, but no method in the world state is more highly used and more effective than propaganda. The world state heavily implemented the use of propaganda to control, to set morals, and to condition the minds of every citizen in their world. However such uses of propaganda have already been used in our world and even at this very moment. The way the media sways us how to think or how we should feel about a given situation. Often covering the truth and hiding the facts. One of the goals in propaganda is to set the mindset of the people to align with the goal of a current power, such as a
In Utilitarianism, J.S. Mill gives an account for the reasons one must abide by the principles of Utilitarianism. Also referred to as the Greatest-happiness Principle, this doctrine promotes the greatest happiness for the greatest amount of people. More specifically, Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, holding that the right act is that which yields the greatest net utility, or "the total amount of pleasure minus the total amount of pain", for all individuals affected by said act (Joyce, lecture notes from 03/30).
Even though many of Orwell’s ideas in his novel 1984 seemed completely fictional, several of the concepts throughout his book have a common link to today’s society. For instance in the same way telescreens monitor people every second of their li...
Utilitarianism is zdefined, as the right way to act is one that maximizes your happiness, (pleasure and happiness is the absence of pain) while the wrong way is one that produces the opposite i.e. pain. Unhappiness here is defined as pain or the opposite of happiness. This is the basis of utilitarianism or what Mill calls the “greatest happiness principle” and it is the best ethical theory by which humans should follow. The argument for the above is as follows
In recent years, there have been accusations against the media and how it informs us of news. There have also been accusations against public officials on how they may stretch the truth or fudge numbers up. These misrepresentations lead the public to develop a distrust in their government and the media. People are starting to wonder if they’re being told the whole story, or if they’re being lied to. This is particularly true and omniscient in the book 1984. The plot takes place in Oceania, and there is no privacy. The Party knows exactly what you say and do. The Party uses propaganda to make everyone believe what the Party wants them to believe. The term “alternative facts” has been used recently and it bears strong similarity to the principles
The most important question of all is what should one do since the ultimate purpose of answering questions is either to satisfy curiosity or to decide which action to take. Complicated analysis is often required to answer that question. Beyond ordinary analysis, one must also have a system of values, and the correct system of values is utilitarianism.
The media takes a biased approach on the news that they cover, giving their audience an incomplete view of what had actually happened in a story. Most people believe that they are not “being propagandized or being in some way manipulated” into thinking a certain way or hearing certain “truths” told by their favorite media outlets (Greenwald 827). In reality, everyone is susceptible to suggestion as emphasized in the article “Limiting Democracy: The American Media’s World View, and Ours.” The
Media in 1984 was completely bias for the party. Winston who worked for the media knew “ every word he murmured into speakwrite, every stroke of his ink pencil, was a deliberate lie” (Orwell 183). The people of 1984 are being completely lied to because of technology. Now that the party has technology to trick people's minds it is taking away their freedom to think for themselves. This is also the same for the modern media “ 74% say that news organization tend to be bias” (Mitchell, Gottfried, Barthel, Shearer 2). People in the modern world believe that most of the news organizations are bias just like the people in 1984. The commonwealth in 1984 are forced to believe in the news media provided because “ big brother is watching you” (Orwell 3). They must watch the same news source because they are forced to. Although in the modern world people have the freedom to chose their news source but, “ 76% of americans say they usually turn to the same sources” (Mitchell, Gottfried, Barthel, Shearer 1). The development of technology has lead to multiple news sources to be developed but people still only turn to one source. Yet people know they are still bias and still continue to watch. This scenario turns people in the modern world just like people 1984. They are forced to watch the same media but know they are bias. This causes the modern world to reduce their own freedoms like the people in 1984 whose are
1984, a novel by George Orwell, represents a dystopian society in which the people of Oceania are surveilled by the government almost all the time and have no freedoms. Today, citizens of the United States and other countries are being watched in a similar way. Though different technological and personal ways of keeping watch on society than 1984, today’s government is also able to monitor most aspects of the people’s life. 1984 might be a dystopian society, but today’s conditions seem to be moving towards that controlling state, where the citizens are surveilled by the government at all times. The 1984 community provided many ways to surveill its citizens, one being The Thought Police.
George Orwell’s novel, 1984, depicts a dystopian vision of the future, one in which its citizens thoughts and actions are controlled by Big Brother government. This novel relates the ruthless surveillance and lack of privacy of the citizens to government actions today. Totalitarianism, surveillance, and lack of privacy may all be common themes in Orwell’s novel 1984, but are also prevalent in modern day society and government. Many people today have and will continue to dismiss the ideologies mentioned in 1984 as unrealistic predictions which could never occur in the democratic run system they live by today. But, are Orwell’s ideologies completely implausible, or have his predictions already played a hidden role in society? Many citizens today are truly unaware of how much of their private lives are made public. Especially with new technological advances, the modern democratic government can easily track and survey citizens without their knowledge. While the government depicted in 1984 may use gadgets such as telescreens and moderators such as the Thought Police these ideas depicted can be seen today in the ever evolving democratic government known to be the "equivalent" of the people's voice. Orwell may have depicted a clearer insight into modern day surveillance then one may have imagined from this "fictional" novel.
There are many essays, papers and books written on the concept of right and wrong. Philosophers have theorized about moral actions for eons, one such philosopher is John Stuart Mill. In his book Utilitarianism he tries to improve on the theories of utilitarianism from previous philosophers, as he is a strong believer himself in the theory. In Mill's book he presents the ideology that there is another branch on the utilitarian tree. This branch being called rule-utilitarianism. Mill makes a distinction between two different types of utilitarianism; act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism. Rule-utilitarianism seems like a major advance over the simple theory of act-utilitarianism. But for all its added complexity, it may not actually be a significant improvement. This is proven when looking at the flaws in act-utilitarianism and relating them to the ways in which rule-utilitarianism tries to overcome them. As well one must look at the obstacles that rule-utilitarianism has on it's own as a theory. The problems of both act and rule utilitarianism consist of being too permissive and being able to justify any crime, not being able to predict the outcomes of one's actions, non-universality and the lose of freewill.
In its political philosophy utilitarianism provides an alternative to theories of natural law and the social contract by basing the authority of government and the sanctity of individual rights upon their utility, or measure of happiness gained. As an egalitarian doctrine, where everyone’s happiness counts equally, the rational, relatively straightforward nature of utilitarianism offers an attractive model for democratic government. It offers practical methods for deciding the morally right course of action - “...an action is right as it tends to promote happiness, wrong as it tends to diminish it, for the party whose interests are in question” (Bentham, 1780). To discover what we should do in a given situation, we identify the various courses of action that we could take, then determine any foreseeable benefits and harms to all affected by the ramifications of our decision. In fact, some of the early pioneers of utilitarianism, such as Bentham and Mill, campaigned for equality in terms of women's suffrage, decriminalization of homosexuality, and abolition of slavery (Boralevi, 1984). Utilitarianism seems to support democracy as one could interpret governments working to promote the public interest and welfare of citizens as striving for liberty for the greatest amount of people. While utilitarianism at its heart is a theory that calls for progressive social change through peaceful political processes, there are some difficulties in relying on it as the sole method for moral decision-making. In this essay I will assess the effectiveness of utilitarianism as a philosophy of government by examining the arguments against it.