Some talk radio hosts thrive by harping on "media bias": the belief that his/her point of view is so infallible that everyone should fall in line and agree...that only the truly addled would follow another school of thought. The addled, that is, or those who can't make up their mind because television/newspapers/radio purposely mislead by slanting the news to their own (usually liberal) point of view.
A more intelligent and well-founded fear, for those who truly worry about the media's adversarial role in government and society, is the effect of cash on the news gathering process.
By virtue of being in the business of making money, today's media companies are forced to cut, scrimp and do their job on the cheap--a situation aggravated by the concentration of ownership. Readers/viewers want news. Shareholders want profit.
The money that's saved sometimes gets spent not to gather the news but to buy it--paying sources for access, stories, photos and the like. Network morning shows send flowers to grieving parents, hoping they'll share a couch with Matt or Diane the next morning. Others take it a step further.
Enter Anna Nicole Smith's exit.
The only thing more certain than our unquenchable appetite for the un-newsworthy is the fact that someone will pull out the checkbook in a quest to feed it. That's when credibility--already in short supply in this tawdry tale--seems destined to swirl around the bowl.
Is this the case of those playing by the rules crying "foul", or is there truly a rat being smelled here? Read on, if you dare: http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/col/rhuff/
No comments:
Post a Comment