|
Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, et al. really piss me off. The phrase "liberal news media" in particular gets me going in a way that very few other things do. It's a ham-fisted, uninformed, simplistic, and effective way of creating a perception that is all about furthering themselves in their careers in punditry. It has nothing to do with any facts, research, or actual bias existing in media. Despite this, the phrase has become a buzzword associated with almost every successful right-wing political pundit you can name.
I think that this would be a good drinking game. Flip on Fox News Channel or turn on your local AM bastion of right-wing talk radio. Take a shot every time anyone says "liberal news media." You can immediately stop if anyone attempts to define or substantiate the claim that the entirety of news media has a left-wing bias. I'll see you in the emergency room in an hour or two.
Ask yourself, who does the phrase "liberal news media" benefit? It is very much in the interest of a person like Bill O'Reilly to convince you that he is the only person you should listen to because, see, everyone else is evil or incompetent. Everyone else has an agenda. No one else can be trusted. This method of media consumption is unhealthy. It does exactly the opposite of what our democracy was founded upon. Instead of fostering discussion and diversity of viewpoints, it indoctrinates.
Guilty of Their Own Agenda
Paradoxically, these pundits are guilty of doing the very thing that lies at the heart of their accusations. They claim that there is an agenda in media that caters toward only certain ways of thinking. By discounting other sources of media this way, they are themselves creating an agenda.
Their agenda is to be distrustful of all sources of media that are not them. While we should as educated consumers of media question sources as often as possible, the problem is that these pundits, through the use of the phrase "liberal news media," are encouraging their viewers to only question other sources of media. Magically, this benefits the person speaking in terms of cultivating an audience.
As Real as Roswell and the Shooter on the Grassy Knoll
The truth is that the "liberal news media" does not exist. It cannot exist. While the last 15-20 years have seen a rise in media conglomeration, there is not conglomeration to the extent that only one entity controls media. There are simply too many levels to media and too many different purveyors of media. There are subjects, writers, editors, actors, executive producers, and run of the mill executives.
If there really were a liberal conspiracy, all of those people would have to sign off on it. And, the ones that did not agree to sign off on it would have to agree to not talk about it. Even less likely, is the fact that a conspiracy would require competing organizations to cooperate with each other in this conspiracy. While I am sure that agendas can be set on a per-organization basis, there is absolutely nothing to enforce a similarity in agendas between organizations.
In fact, the marketplace, one of the things conservatives like to rely on quite often, dictates that differing agendas should prosper. Organizations only draw competition by crafting a similar business strategy to another organization. Surely, if the market is saturated with corporations of type Y, then a decent business strategy would be to create a corporation of type Z in order to be set apart. While a difference in type does not necessarily ensure success, it does ensure easier branding and marketing.
Success is its Own Disproof
This is exactly what Fox News Channel has done. They have crafted their brand as a counterpoint to the entirety of the rest of news media. Their slogan, “Fair and Balanced,” insinuates that other stations are neither balanced nor fair, and it has worked. They are an extremely popular outlet in certain segments and demographics. Air America would kill to be that successful.
The silliest part is that the existence and success of Fox News Channel disproves many of their pundits’ accusations. If there really were a liberal conspiracy in news media, Bill O’Reilly would not have a pulpit to preach from. That would be some weak conspiracy to permit not only one, but several, political pundits to have extremely large audiences across many different media outlets.
Media is media. Make no mistake about it. Anytime an entity is packaging and designing something for public consumption, that person is involved in the creation of media. No matter the intention, that person, upon publishing has transitioned from being a consumer of media to being a producer of media. This is the case no matter what they say, and also whether or not it serves their purpose.
Irresponsibility and Stupidity
The whole thing is just stupid, and smacks of immature fear-mongering and indoctrination. In constructing their bleak picture of media, these pundits that use the phrase “liberal news media,” have conveniently forgotten to draw themselves in.
Any source of media that overtly encourages its viewers to discount the opinions of others, in favor of itself, cannot and should not be trusted. It is completely counter to the marketplace of ideas, and is fundamentally irresponsible. The public should not be encouraged to expect media to interpret media for them. That is simply not a job that can be outsourced.
Trackback(0)
 |
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/Hide comments