You've reached our premium or archival content
To access this page, and more great content just like it, you need to become a paid subscriber.
If you already have an account, please login.
Otherwise, registration is quick and you'll have access instantly after payment.
If you want to know the problem with the media in the US, as a "rough guide", I suggest that one watches the movies "Vice", "The Loudest Voice" (series) and "Bombshell", particularly "Vice" and "The Loudest Voice". It starts with the rescinding the laws which required broadcasters to be balanced. For example, the network depicted in movies did not let the other side express their viewpoint. In "The Loudest Voice", an interviewee who expressed views opposite to the network and its presenters were shouted down. I have seen Bill O'Reilly do the same thing with views by angrily shouting at the talent with opposite views to O'Reilly.
Prima facie, having talent with opposite views to the network is entertaining. The 'flip side' is that viewers will not hear an alternative side.
Rather than shouting and suppressing talent with opposite views, wouldn't it have been more constructive for the interviewer to ask questions through its own political prism, and at the same time, the interviewee (talent) respond critically and intelligently. That could regardless of political prism.
In addition, as this article addresses the US 'shock jocks' unsubstantiated conspiracy theories and giving the audience impression that they're in a perpetual state of crisis, one story or issue at a time.
So the US has a substantial size of its populace consuming Fox and shock jocks. This kind of culture is closed to other viewpoints or the opportunity to challenge other viewpoints or even accepting other viewpoints.
But suppose Mr Trump didn't like CNN. Instead of attacking and insulting non-Fox and non-shock-jock media, he should have availed himself of being interviewed on CNN and intelligently refuted anything proffered by the interviewer. The gold standard is Mr John Laws OBE, in his book "Lawsie: Well You Wanted To Know", ISBN 9781742579870. Even if the mini polls he conducted favoured Mr Fraser, Mr Laws was open to interviewing Mr Whitlam and Mr Hayden.
People from both sides of politics were invited onto the show and they were prepared to express and defend their views. Not for the Fox and shock-jock programmers.
But there is a general malaise in the reporting of news. News has become entertainment, the time of coverage of talent's views has been reduced from 42 seconds to a few seconds, "if it bleeds and leads". The news departments in terms of its bottom line, pages 935, 936 C.T. Bogus, "The Death of an Honourable Profession" (1996),71 IndianaL. J. 911,
The seven second grab is the new normal. BUT saying the essential message in 140 characters has been reduced to rants.
Regardless of Mr Trump's policies which included midway through the administration's term the lowest unemployment rate in 50 years and 400 thousand manufacturing jobs, to name a few, https://www.whitehouse.gov/trump-administration-accomplishments/ .
One cannot convey a message in 140 characters of the administration's achievements. We rely on the media to convey what is happening around the world, and what is happening in government and business.
For the media to take a particular by closing alternative views and not lend itself to constructive criticism is not healthy.
Similarly, the talent must also be open to answer questions intelligently from interviewers whose views may be contrary to the interviewer.
Thank you,
Anthony of critical Belfield