Media plays a crucial role in the dissemination of information from the power-elites to the masses in the United States. Americans today consume news information largely through the use of television, and to a lesser extent newspapers and radio. Those who control the information presented in these mediums enjoy a wealth of influence in relation to the political and social values of ordinary Americans. Elites within the industry accomplish their mission of political and social influence by utilizing the six political functions of mass media; news making, interpretation, socialization, persuasion, agenda setting and framing. “News making is deciding what and who are newsworthy and allocating precious television time and newspaper space accordingly.” (Dye & Zeigler, p. 125) Executives, editors, anchors and the like make crucial decisions in regards to which stories make the headlines or are featured during news casts. Given that the average American does little to no research of their own, the decisions made by these media elites are instrumental in the formulation of public opinion. News making is clearly demonstrated when one watches the recent Republican presidential debates. During the CBS News/National Journal Debate which took place in November of last year, presidential candidate Dr. Ron Paul was given only 90 seconds to speak during a hour and a half debate. A study conducted by the University of Minnesota found that “at the midway point, Romney had spoke for 7 minutes and 25 seconds – more than Gingrich, Paul, Huntsman, and Santorum recorded for the entire debate.” (Ostermeier) Clearly the media-elite favorite, Mitt Romney has vastly outpaced the rest of the Republican field in terms of on air time during the ... ... middle of paper ... ...and how this project affects your life.” They know that not every viewer will be affected by the road work, but their taxes will be affected as the government spends to improve roads, giving the story importance to many viewers. As seen in the above examples, mass media has an enormous impact on the political and social values of Americans. Works Cited Dye, Thomas R, Zeigler. The Irony of Democracy. 14th ed. Boston: Wadsworth, 2009. Print. London, Scott. "How the Media Frames Political Issues." Scott London Reports. Scott London. 7 February 2012. . Ostermeier, Eric. "Equal Time? Romney Records One Quarter of Face Time at New Hampshire Debate." Smart Politics. 12 October 2011. University of Minnesota. 7 February 2012. .
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.
It is no secret that in society no matter where a person goes they will be surrounded by influences of news media and social media. There are televisions in restaurants, gyms, and homes, and on them there is a constant stream of twenty-four hour news. Often times what is being reported on television, or through news apps, is being presented primarily for an entertainment purpose. This is what George Saunders analyzes in his 2007 essay, “The Braindead Megaphone,” in which he criticizes not only the news media system, but also society as a whole, for the way news is received and accepted. He speaks to the fact that news media has an expectation that society doesn’t reflect, or have critism, for what is reported to them. Society accepts what they hear, because it is coming form a reliable source. He says, “Does stupid, near-omnipresent media
According to Mackay (2009, p. 466), Agenda setting theory suggests that the media has the ability to influence the public’s way of thinking through the topics that are covered. If a news item is more prominently covered, it is thought that
According to James Madison, “nothing could be more irrational than to give the people power and to withhold from them information, without which power is abused,” suggesting that the people have the right to learn popular information and learn both sides of an issue (Paul and Elder 2). However, in modern society, the media often do not present both sides of an issue and are inclined to often mask information for their personal benefits. Therefore, the people often learn and understand only one aspect of an issue and inevitably lean towards the bias present in that news account. Indubitably, the coverage in the mainstream news media influences the majority through its bias and propaganda, especially its partisan audience, which only appreciates one side of the news story. Thus, even though news networks may claim that their news programs and publications are completely factual and credible, their coverage of news events is politically, commercially, and racially biased.
In the Beyond Borders textbook on pages 60-74 Michael Parenti’s article “Mass Media: For the Many, by the Few” goes into great detail of the few corporations that control the media and the costs of this practice. Let us first discuss what classifies as media. We have newspapers, magazines, radio, films, television, etc. Television and radio are the most dominated forms of media that are in the hands of four giant networks, which are, ABC, CBS, NBC, and FOX. These media corporations not only own television networks but other forms of media, such as; cable companies, book publishing houses, movie studios, satellite television, etc. Since the broadcast industry has failed to provide adequate regulation policies the competition has decreased, and this has caused a large economic influence. The competition was supposed to lower prices, instead there has been an increase in cable rates and phone rates. In addition, media owners don’t hesitate to exercise control over news content. They frequently kill stories they dislike and in other ways inject their own preferences. In other words, they determine which person, which facts, which version of the facts, and which ideas shall reach the public. The media can also have a political influence. “Progressive candidates are not only competing against well-financed opponents but also against the media’s many frivolous distractions. It is nearly impossible for these candidates to try and run a meaningful campaign because the media will withhold their media coverage .” The few corporations can spin the media any which way. In sum, the media is ne...
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...
Today’s society has a multitude of issues, all of which are broadcasted on television, printed in newspapers, and posted on social media. Each source of media plays a large role in how we interpret and react to these issues. Different sources of media offer varying outlooks on these issues. Some offer factual information while others offer emotional reactions. Either way, the media is one of the biggest indicators of how our society views these issues.
This growing influence of the mass media and changes in communication has led to the subordination of the power of other influential institutions in society. “This process is referred to as “mediatisation” and as a result of mediatisation institutions in society and society as a whole is shaped by and ultimately dependent on the mass media” (Mazzoleni and Schulz 1999: 247 – 261). This ultimately means a “media logic” has formed. In relation to politics the theory of mediatisation is extremely relevant as it is argued that the media shapes political campaigns and political figures. However others argue that the theory of mediatisation and the media has no influence over politics nor does it shape politics. Also that politics remains in control of political processes and functions. In this essay I plan to delve into these arguments to then come up with a conclusion to answer the question of whether there has actually been a “mediatisation” of politics.
Mass media is a growing business, normally controlled by giant corporations. In fact majority of national news in only covered by few sources known as “Big Media” consisting of ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, Time magazine, and United Press International. (Mary 6). Because the media is so big often the corporations determine what is to be given national attention such as the presidential elections. Leaving the opinions of others to change american politics. Mass media has shaped the political system by using the method “Share This” a social media tactic, televising campaign ads or other political views, and by integrating “Live Media Debates”.
First, let me present an eye opening definition of news from Lester, stating, “[news] is defined firstly by those who have privileged access to the media […] it is then aimed at attracting and entertaining an audience for advertisers, and fitted into a general framework that suits corporate owners” (p.60). It is frightening to think that most of the media we consume depends on a system that is regulated by producers of news affiliated with society’s elite. In furtherance of this idea, I would like to look towards Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (1988 p.1) that
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).
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 structure, have always dependent upon the media’s ability to socialize. The U.S. government generally will exploit 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. One way in which government achieves this objective, is by its ability to misuse the media’s ability to set the agenda. Contrary to popular belief, media is in fact an enormous hegemony. In fact, separate independent news organizations relatively do not exist. Rather than creating an independent structured agenda of there own, generally lesser smaller news organizations adapt to a prepared agenda, previously constructed by a higher medium. Based upon this information alone, it is quite apparent that media functions in adherence to the characteristics of a hierarchy. This simply means that media is structured in a way that it operates functioning from top to bottom. This is also identical to the hierarchical nature of the human body, in that from the commands of the brain transferred through the central nervous system, the body responds accordingly. In order for the U.S. government to control and determine the public’s popular perception of reality, the government must shape and oversee the information that the media reports to the existing populous. This particular process of democracy is known and referred to by political scientists as cognitive socialization. However, many of us, who do not adhere to the cushioning of political correctness, refer to it as the propaganda machine. Numerous political scientists consider cognitive socialization to be the most effective form of political socialization. According to theory, cognitive socialization is doctored up information, which is strategically fragmented in such a manipulative manner, that the probability of its rationalization is highly predictable. The manipulative properties of cognitive socialization are so diabolical and Machiavellian in nature, that I consider it to be the ultimate perversion of the democratic process. In all seriousness, numerous intellectuals, and gentleman held in good stature agree, that cognitive socialization is the product of an evil genius.
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,
Americans look to the press to provide the information they need to make informed political choices. How well the press lives up to its responsibility to provide this information has a direct impact upon Americans: how they think about and act upon the issues that confront them.
In our democratic society, mass media is the driving force of public opinion. Media sources such as Internet, newspaper, news-broadcasts, etc, play significant roles in shaping a person’s understanding and perception about the events occurred in our daily lives. As long as the newspapers, internet, network television, etc, continued to be easily accessible to the public, the media will continue to have an influence in shaping its opinions. Factors such as agenda-setting, framing and priming help shape the public opinions. Agenda-setting is when the media focuses their attention on selected issues on which the public will form opinion on, whereas framing allows the media to select certain aspects about the problem and then make them appear more salient. Similarly, priming works by repeatedly exposing certain issues to public. As the issues get more exposure, the individual will be more likely to recall or retain the information in their minds. This paper will discuss these three factors played out systemically by media and how our opinions are constantly being influence and shape by them.