|
Television Propaganda Illusion
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Shakka |
| Network is a great film. "I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore!" |
|
|
| Krypton |
| Watch 6 hours of TV, you've watched about an hour of commercials (i.e. corporate propaganda). Media's primary role is attracting advertisers by selling them the audience they have, thus the importance of having high viewership and ratings. So Fox News caters to conservative audiences. MSNBC caters to liberal audiences. The Discovery Channel to more intellectual audiences, the E channel to audiences who care about celebrity news...I hate the fact that I pay for satellite television, but still have to watch the damn commercials. If I pay for TV, why the hell do I have to watch commercials?? |
|
|
| Krypton |
Can't forget about the propaganda model...
| quote: | Mainstream Media
Chomsky has argued that inherent within private media is a systemic bias which is the anti-thesis of objective journalism. He developed the “Propaganda Model” in a 1988 book written with Edward Herman called Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. The theory postulates that a media corporation's main objective is to profit from the selling of a product. The product is the news broadcast but the customers are not the audience which watches the broadcasts. Advertisers are the greatest interest of any media broadcaster because they are the primary source of revenue for any private media company. The model postulates a series of 5 filters of media which influence the coverage of news events (1988)...
1. Ownership
2. Funding
3. Sourcing
4. Flak
5. Anti-Ideologies
The majority of the mass media is owned by a select few multi-national corporation's such as General Electric or News Corp. The first filter postulates that these companies have financial interests far exceeding simple media. If these companies encounter a news event which may be detrimental to their corporate interests, their coverage of that event will probably be censored to protect such interests. Media companies must also protect their sources of revenue which is the advertisers. News is not the product of mass media but rather their advertisements. According to the “Funding Filter” (1988), publications and broadcasts are not designed for the best method of news coverage, but rather, are designed to attract readers and viewers to their brand. Doing this enables the media company to sell more of their advertising space (which is their main product) and so ratings become much more important than news coverage.
Most media companies form a special sourcing relationship with the government, specifically, the White House and Pentagon. The relationship can best be described as symbiotic; I will help you if you help me. In the event a journalist decides to challenge government policy by asking tough questions to policy officials, they are more likely to be shut out of future press conferences or denied future interviews. Most avoid asking such questions to preserve their place in future press conferences and interview time. The government or Pentagon becomes the source of facts while the journalist merely writes them down for publication. This is in detriment to objective journalism.
Flak is a term used to describe any backlash of a publication or broadcast which goes against the status quo. This is important because in the event a journalist publishes a highly critical piece which criticizes a powerful corporate or governmental interest, the flak received could be influential enough to derail the entire media company. So publications or broadcasts must be censored to protect the company from special interest groups, lobby groups, shareholder petitions, FCC inquiries, etc. This is one more filter of news coverage.
Anti-ideologies compose the 5th filter and probably the most important. Mass media companies take advantage of the public's fears against real, potential, or exaggerated dangers. Anti-communism was the ideology which took advantage of the people's fear of the Soviet Union, and was used as a means to silence those critical of elite interests as communist sympathizers. Today, the anti-ideology is Islamism. Little coverage is given in the mass media of very important Muslim grievances against the West. Media companies such as Fox News take advantage of the public's fear of terrorism and uses it to justify all American interests in the Middle East as a “War on Terror”.
The propaganda model in essence labels all mass media corporation's as capitalist propaganda and justifies this conclusion with the premises of 5 filters which news coverage must fall through before publication or broadcast. The solution to such propaganda is independent media such as the BBC, PBS, and a myriad of news organizations which are publicly funded. |
http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...66&pagenumber=2 |
|
|
| Shakka |
| I watch a lot of Food TV. I'm not obese yet, but I fear they may have me in their sights. |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
I watch a lot of Food TV. I'm not obese yet, but I fear they may have me in their sights. |
I work for the place that broadcasts that channel... :eek:
(among other channels)
They do have some good shows |
|
|
| Q5echo |
i don't care where you are politically or on "media propaganda" but you gotta love The Soup.
 |
|
|
| LatinLover |
| ^^Wow dude i like your sig :haha: didnt noticed it till now. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: |
Little coverage is given in the mass media of very important Muslim grievances against the West. |
that might be the case in the US, but i think other countries' arent quite so easily dismissed (particularly australia or britain).
| quote: |
The propaganda model in essence labels all mass media corporation's as capitalist propaganda and justifies this conclusion with the premises of 5 filters which news coverage must fall through before publication or broadcast. The solution to such propaganda is independent media such as the BBC, PBS, and a myriad of news organizations which are publicly funded. |
now, its been several years since i read any chomsky, but i am kind've puzzled by the "solution" here.
the BBC isn't independent necessarily, indeed it is government owned (senior appointments are made by the government and all the funding comes from the government etc). why would chomsky favour/trust the state apparatus, unless we're talking about the relative importance of the lesser of two evils? |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by LatinLover
^^Wow dude i like your sig :haha: didnt noticed it till now. |
i know, right?
beware the Chosen One.
 |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
i know, right?
beware the Chosen One.
|
funny, coz any could be a better president than george. |
|
|
| mndeg |
| I canceled my Comcast television but I still get it :) |
|
|
|
|
