Critical Evaluation Of Today’s Media In Politics
Mass media in the twenty-first century has revolutionized politics. It allows for a quick and accessible way to stay informed. Breaking news, interviews with elected officials, and insight about what is happening on Capitol Hill is simply a touch away for most people (Harrison et al. 322). As great as this all sounds, mass media also comes with quite a few problems. The main challenges of mass media today are the centralized control most forms of media are heading toward, the consumers single-minded interest that brings about a lack of debate, and the bias in the media.Centrilized control is real problem in the media today. Centrilized control comes about by consolidation or the “phenomenon of large corporations buying smaller one so that there are fewer companies’ products available” (Harrison et al. 321).
This limits the market and, in medias case, the broadcasting. This, in turn, also limits the number of available viewpoints and coverage on an issue (Harrison et al. 321). “The six media giants today are Time Warner, Walt Disney, Viacom, News Corporation, CBS Corporation, and Comcast” (Harrison et al. 322). With the same media outlets controlling everything how will new opinions surface?Consumers becoming single-minded in theirs views is, in part, centralized control’s fault but it is also due to narrowcasting and media segmentation.
Narrowcasting, “the practice of aiming media content at specific segments of the public” (Harrison et al. 320), it also limits the different viewpoints and ideas the consumer is exposed to. For example, if a consumer mainly watches a broadcast with democratic viewpoints such as CNN, they have no experience with republican views found on a channel such as FOX News (Harrison et al. 320). Narrowcasting leads to media segmentation or “the breaking down of the media in general according to specific audiences they target” (Harrison et al. 320).
Media segmentation leads to networks with specific audiences that have no exposure to the other audiences or their ideas. For example, Instagram is mainly targeted for the younger, teen population while Facebook is thought to be mainly for adults. This doesn’t mean an adult can’t have an Instagram and a teen can’t have a Facebook page, but the marketing mainly targets these groups for their respective media. Both these issues lead to a narrow-minded audience who have had little to no experience with opposite opinions.
The last criticism of the media is quite controversial. Many will deny it but there is bias in the media. They either select what issues too cover or favor one side over another (Harrison et al. 323). Such as my previous examples of CNN and Fox news it is obvious which side they lean when covering news. News will tend to report on the bad over the good, for it is what gains the most views. Even if the news shows bias in exemplifying the bad, isn’t it also the consumers fault for preferring the negative over the positive? While bias in the media may not be particularly right, it is expected.
We are human, and each have different opinions that may leak into our writing or reporting.In ending, the media may be a great too for faster news, but what about the content of this news? Is it from a centralized company that took over a smaller corporation? Is it a product of narrowcasting or media segmentation that is delivering only the news a specific audience wishes? Does it have bias in it, reporting on one side and how it is superior to the other? The media is a useful tool for news, but consumers must evaluate the news they are receiving from the media (Harrison et al. 311).
Works Cited
Harrison, Brigid C, et al. American Democracy Now. 4th ed., McGraw-Hill Education, 2018.
