One must never forget that in a discussion of media ethics, that News Media is a business engaged in a competitive world to grab as much attention in terms of viewer numbers so that they can either get more advertising or charge more for advertising depending on the ratings.
One can include television programs, soaps and movies as examples of media influencing public opinion and their effectiveness is even greater in poorer countries with limited choice of papers and viewing.
The journalist is therefore under constant pressure to perform and in this regard there have been instances even at the New York Times of fabrication of news. This pressure influences the journalist to word an event to sensationalize them so that it would grab the attention of the viewer or reader. Even photo-journalism can be misused in this regard, as the angle of the picture can tell a very different story from the actual.
There is a need to get a scoop and in so doing a mundane event can look like an important one. There are some topics that are hot topics and more than a fair share of news pertains to that, such as the Iraq war, and Global Warming in the international media and the LTTE civil war incidents in Sri Lanka. Media does not necessarily cover topics of interest to public as often the journalists are out of tune to the readership or viewership, coming from a different background in some cases, and therefore concentrating on topics that matter to them.
People are often not told the whole story, the important story and are influenced to give importance to topics they would otherwise not be interested in as it does not affect their daily lives. One must bear in mind sensational gossipy stories are now commonplace on the grounds that news is also entertainment and therefore the under the sheets activities of the rich and famous also become news. The word is to dig dirt on people to bring them down a peg, a human frailty.
When news or programs are viewed in this light, then a more balanced opinion can be formed, but the problem still remains, that there is a lack of perception and cynicism in what is presented and a lot of believing what is fed in a literal sense of the word.
Showing posts with label Media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Media. Show all posts
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Media responsibilities: a perspective of two specific examples
I will start by looking at the delicate balance of having to report on the campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for the right to represent the Democratic Party at November’s general election. With the two candidates running neck and neck, a balanced reporting aim by the large news media outlets is extremely difficult to ensure. A reporting journalist, by his very words could sound biased. A news editor by choosing the news story can influence one side over the other and either party can make claims of unfair reporting leaning to the opposing side.
I am certain that there are behind the scenes meetings to ensure that there is balance and duration of news clips and angles carefully calculated to back up the claim of fair reporting. Obviously if a media outlet comes out backing one candidate over another, it will get easier to justify reporting angles and biases.
Of course the alert listener, reader or viewer may interpret a bias in a different way to the editor who includes a piece of reporting. The subtleties of reporting can influence the user and in this tight race make a difference, which will eventually determine the candidate and in an indirect way the future president and the course of world events.
Only when one carries through this argument all the way can one realize the importance of the responsibility the media outlet has in influencing world affairs, through the future leadership of the US.
In Sri Lanka on a completely different note, the current controversy of the government and private media reporting on human rights abuses is worth looking at also. The state denies and refutes all allegations, blaming it all on LTTE backed NGOs and unpatriotic reporters sensationalizing incidents to promote their agendas, making the conduct of war much harder.
Even here some form of responsible reporting is necessary in a framework of informing and educating the public on what is happening. Private media also self regulate in order not to rock the boat too much and incur the wrath of state control, and the loss of state largesse in the form of advertising revenue.
It is noteworthy that there has not been one incident of the abuser being caught and owning up to who his patron is so that a finger can be pointed at the state. The seeming ability of the state machinery to get away with killings, and abductions is emboldening these methods of intimidation and abuse with the investigative arms of the police being singularly unable to prosecute any of these cases.
Therefore while the news of abductions is reported, it is up to international bodies to point the finger at the government. The recent incident where the US government country report cited Sri Lanka very poor in terms of Human Rights violations, which was vehemently denied by the government, maintained as fact by the Embassy, is a case in point. Of course one sides view of what is a Human Rights violation is another’s right to refute. Some appear to condone others to castigate depending on the moral stance taken. In a time of war the criteria can change from that in a period of peace.
When the reporter is culturally different it adds another dimension to the problem, bringing race bias into the argument because an outsider usually reports with a normal bias towards minority communities. It is done with the knowledge that power is on the side of the state and it is up to the state to defend the accusations if untrue as there is assumed the other party has less of a chance to present their views.
In the current furor over the reporting of the uprisings in Tibet, China has banned and censored all reports. The average Chinese takes the governments line and international media through the new technology of I reporting by amateurs, using mobile phones and uploading direct to the Internet from the site, to sensationalize reports without verifying the extent. An isolated incident in a village can seem in the news to be extensive.
In the same light, the Tibetan groups in Tibet, exiles outside the country and ethnic Tibetans in China seem to have come together in a planned uprising to bring world attention to their plight at a time when this is embarrassing to the Chinese government in the light of the impending Olympic Games and the disruption it may cause. It is an opportunistic move on the part of the Tibetans and here again it is up to the Chinese authorities to deal with it fairly, so as not to antagonize world sympathy for an ethnic minority that has been agitating ever since the Chinese takeover of Tibet for over 50 years. There is no doubt as to the outcome, as the might of the Chinese military will quell the agitation. The way in which China deals with the issue, will determine how they are perceived with respect to Human Rights abuses and tolerance of dissent from within.
In the instances referred to here, it is apparent that the Media is very powerful in shaping public opinion, and with this power comes responsibility to be as fair as possible to all sides as both sides present a different view-point. It is also true that journalists are mere employees trying to become more prominent in their fields and sometimes sensationalize a report to advance their personal agendas, just like any other employee in any other job trying to get a promotion.
The use of proportionate reporting is not possible as each news item carries a similar weight irrespective of the importance of the news, as that is the nature of the beast called News Reports.
The manipulation of news is common in all countries especially the West, with specific regard to the US, which is even more savvy at it than say either Russia or China and in my opinion, India has the most balanced reporting bias, with democracy and journalistic ethics to be admired and emulated. No one is perfect and the public should learn to be more cynical and able to sift information fed to them rather than believe everything they are told.
To conclude we should be aware of the power of all arms of media, and learn to read between the lines to take a proportionate view of the content and come to our conclusions based on our best guess as to the accuracy of what is being reported.
Bear in mind that what is not reported is also news, which we are not told about, and we cannot even imagine what we are not told! One can therefore subscribe to my current opinion that it is not worth watching reading or listening to news as it is not worth it as I can make the news in my head to suit my point of view at any time. This from someone, who was a news addict, not too long ago knowing what was happening in all parts of the world on a daily basis.
In fact my mind is now not clogged with news, and I am free to think.
I am certain that there are behind the scenes meetings to ensure that there is balance and duration of news clips and angles carefully calculated to back up the claim of fair reporting. Obviously if a media outlet comes out backing one candidate over another, it will get easier to justify reporting angles and biases.
Of course the alert listener, reader or viewer may interpret a bias in a different way to the editor who includes a piece of reporting. The subtleties of reporting can influence the user and in this tight race make a difference, which will eventually determine the candidate and in an indirect way the future president and the course of world events.
Only when one carries through this argument all the way can one realize the importance of the responsibility the media outlet has in influencing world affairs, through the future leadership of the US.
In Sri Lanka on a completely different note, the current controversy of the government and private media reporting on human rights abuses is worth looking at also. The state denies and refutes all allegations, blaming it all on LTTE backed NGOs and unpatriotic reporters sensationalizing incidents to promote their agendas, making the conduct of war much harder.
Even here some form of responsible reporting is necessary in a framework of informing and educating the public on what is happening. Private media also self regulate in order not to rock the boat too much and incur the wrath of state control, and the loss of state largesse in the form of advertising revenue.
It is noteworthy that there has not been one incident of the abuser being caught and owning up to who his patron is so that a finger can be pointed at the state. The seeming ability of the state machinery to get away with killings, and abductions is emboldening these methods of intimidation and abuse with the investigative arms of the police being singularly unable to prosecute any of these cases.
Therefore while the news of abductions is reported, it is up to international bodies to point the finger at the government. The recent incident where the US government country report cited Sri Lanka very poor in terms of Human Rights violations, which was vehemently denied by the government, maintained as fact by the Embassy, is a case in point. Of course one sides view of what is a Human Rights violation is another’s right to refute. Some appear to condone others to castigate depending on the moral stance taken. In a time of war the criteria can change from that in a period of peace.
When the reporter is culturally different it adds another dimension to the problem, bringing race bias into the argument because an outsider usually reports with a normal bias towards minority communities. It is done with the knowledge that power is on the side of the state and it is up to the state to defend the accusations if untrue as there is assumed the other party has less of a chance to present their views.
In the current furor over the reporting of the uprisings in Tibet, China has banned and censored all reports. The average Chinese takes the governments line and international media through the new technology of I reporting by amateurs, using mobile phones and uploading direct to the Internet from the site, to sensationalize reports without verifying the extent. An isolated incident in a village can seem in the news to be extensive.
In the same light, the Tibetan groups in Tibet, exiles outside the country and ethnic Tibetans in China seem to have come together in a planned uprising to bring world attention to their plight at a time when this is embarrassing to the Chinese government in the light of the impending Olympic Games and the disruption it may cause. It is an opportunistic move on the part of the Tibetans and here again it is up to the Chinese authorities to deal with it fairly, so as not to antagonize world sympathy for an ethnic minority that has been agitating ever since the Chinese takeover of Tibet for over 50 years. There is no doubt as to the outcome, as the might of the Chinese military will quell the agitation. The way in which China deals with the issue, will determine how they are perceived with respect to Human Rights abuses and tolerance of dissent from within.
In the instances referred to here, it is apparent that the Media is very powerful in shaping public opinion, and with this power comes responsibility to be as fair as possible to all sides as both sides present a different view-point. It is also true that journalists are mere employees trying to become more prominent in their fields and sometimes sensationalize a report to advance their personal agendas, just like any other employee in any other job trying to get a promotion.
The use of proportionate reporting is not possible as each news item carries a similar weight irrespective of the importance of the news, as that is the nature of the beast called News Reports.
The manipulation of news is common in all countries especially the West, with specific regard to the US, which is even more savvy at it than say either Russia or China and in my opinion, India has the most balanced reporting bias, with democracy and journalistic ethics to be admired and emulated. No one is perfect and the public should learn to be more cynical and able to sift information fed to them rather than believe everything they are told.
To conclude we should be aware of the power of all arms of media, and learn to read between the lines to take a proportionate view of the content and come to our conclusions based on our best guess as to the accuracy of what is being reported.
Bear in mind that what is not reported is also news, which we are not told about, and we cannot even imagine what we are not told! One can therefore subscribe to my current opinion that it is not worth watching reading or listening to news as it is not worth it as I can make the news in my head to suit my point of view at any time. This from someone, who was a news addict, not too long ago knowing what was happening in all parts of the world on a daily basis.
In fact my mind is now not clogged with news, and I am free to think.
Friday, June 29, 2007
news hound
There was a time in my past where I could never get enough news. I was a junkie for news. I subscribed to 16 news magazines a month, I read the papers daily and scoured the Internet for more news. I am sure I knew as much or more about what was going around in the world than most people.
Now I don't watch TV catch up on a weeks newspapers all in one go as I don't get any here and am completely ignorant of what is going on in the world. I don't even listen to the radio. I am sure few people will say now that I am in the real world.
Actually, I don't think I miss anything. News of bomb plots, murders, accidents, deaths of famous people, celebrity gossip, latest new gadgets, seem to me what dominates news, and sells papers and attracts viewers. My life is no better or worse for lack of information about them.
I honestly feel that other topics that don't fall into the above are just common sense. Actually there is no need to know anything. News, once all the layers of skin are peeled is just another form of entertainment I can do without. I can choose a more satisfying form of entertainment instead.
It is amazing therefore to think that something I felt I could not do without is almost irrelevant now. I can carry myself in company without knowing the latest news because I have things that I can talk about that others find even more interesting. So my lack of knowledge on the latest topic is not a hindrance.
It is therefore a wake up call to know that what we feel we cannot do without can often be discarded with no repercussions and sometimes for the better.
Now I don't watch TV catch up on a weeks newspapers all in one go as I don't get any here and am completely ignorant of what is going on in the world. I don't even listen to the radio. I am sure few people will say now that I am in the real world.
Actually, I don't think I miss anything. News of bomb plots, murders, accidents, deaths of famous people, celebrity gossip, latest new gadgets, seem to me what dominates news, and sells papers and attracts viewers. My life is no better or worse for lack of information about them.
I honestly feel that other topics that don't fall into the above are just common sense. Actually there is no need to know anything. News, once all the layers of skin are peeled is just another form of entertainment I can do without. I can choose a more satisfying form of entertainment instead.
It is amazing therefore to think that something I felt I could not do without is almost irrelevant now. I can carry myself in company without knowing the latest news because I have things that I can talk about that others find even more interesting. So my lack of knowledge on the latest topic is not a hindrance.
It is therefore a wake up call to know that what we feel we cannot do without can often be discarded with no repercussions and sometimes for the better.
talk radio
The United States has seen an incredible growth in talk radio and its influence on public opinion over the past ten years. The Houses of Congress and the President keeps tabs on views and opinions and the polls on the different topics covered therein. This affects how some issues are debated and voted on by the elected members of congress. In that sense public opinion affects the laws being enacted or voted down. We may disagree with the outcome, but this is grass roots democracy at work.
It is common that extreme views and extreme questions are put forward in talk radio, as that encourages heated debate with people taking strong positions in opposing camps. Talk radio influenced the Senate resulting in their inability to pass comprehensive Immigration reform because of overwhelming public opinion against it. Talk radio resurrected the fear factor and prejudice which in many societies is just under the surface, even in the US.
We in Sri Lanka can learn from this exercise, as we should employ talk radio for people to express their opinions on the ethnic conflict, much of which can be incendiary to the opposing side. However this is better, than pent up anger, resulting in violence against innocent civilians.
The public should be given a chance to vent their anger against laws and politicians, in the hope that it can lead to some good. Then people can feel that their voice now muzzled till the next election is heard, and politicians can be brought in to answer questions and lead to a representative form of democracy.
The Sinhala radio has a well developed talk radio system of a very harmless nature, that can be directed towards a more political debate. With the gagging of journalists and freedom of expression in recent times, no radio station wants to risk being banned. This is an area where both responsible journalism and government can agree on terms of reference to allow the feelings of the man in street to be aired.
It is common that extreme views and extreme questions are put forward in talk radio, as that encourages heated debate with people taking strong positions in opposing camps. Talk radio influenced the Senate resulting in their inability to pass comprehensive Immigration reform because of overwhelming public opinion against it. Talk radio resurrected the fear factor and prejudice which in many societies is just under the surface, even in the US.
We in Sri Lanka can learn from this exercise, as we should employ talk radio for people to express their opinions on the ethnic conflict, much of which can be incendiary to the opposing side. However this is better, than pent up anger, resulting in violence against innocent civilians.
The public should be given a chance to vent their anger against laws and politicians, in the hope that it can lead to some good. Then people can feel that their voice now muzzled till the next election is heard, and politicians can be brought in to answer questions and lead to a representative form of democracy.
The Sinhala radio has a well developed talk radio system of a very harmless nature, that can be directed towards a more political debate. With the gagging of journalists and freedom of expression in recent times, no radio station wants to risk being banned. This is an area where both responsible journalism and government can agree on terms of reference to allow the feelings of the man in street to be aired.
the power of tv
My observations of living in this village on the power of TV amongst my neighbors. I don't have electricity yet so I don't have a TV but I am sure the first thing the staff will want once I get electricity is a TV.
Like I said, one of my neighbors got an electricity connection two months ago, the first thing they did was to go to Abans and buy a flat screen TV (not LCD) on which they have to make monthly payments for 36 months.
Prior to TV those especially in villages were immune from the outside world and appeared to live in a more contented life. I do not advocate a return to that time. Once TV arrived, many people who were not aware of how others lived, reasoned that they are poor. So their perception was that they are poor and that was something not good and someone should try and improve their situation. They could not afford the soap on the TV or the other gadgets advertised as must have items so they were poor.
Along with TV came the travelling salesman from the electronics companies. They sold refrigerators to the villages based on the low payment plans, but for extended periods, not really explaining the APR on the hire purchase plan. One of my neighbors has a double door fridge. They have to make monthly payments of about Rs 1500/-. The head of household is a small farmer who finds it hard to make ends meet. His wife cooks all three meals fresh with a large helping of rice. The fridge is only used to cool water, and otherwise it is empty. He complained that his electricity bill rose by over Rs 700/- a month as a result. I told him to fill the fridge with bottles of water to reduce power consumption.
I digress from the point I was trying to illustrate. With little entertainment in the village, and a lack of books to read, watching tv is the pastime in the evenings till bed time. It is fair to say that soaps are the most popular and many of them are canned Indian soaps that are dubbed to Sinhala. The life style of the soaps are those that are admired. They involve a lot of liberal lifestyles that are alien to the village and now seen as acceptable. There is no rational evaluation that this is just a foreign soap, and therefore the benefit of the entertainment aspect is outweighed by the examples of living that draw people from villages to cities.
I believe that a code of ethics be set up after a study of the problem, to give a better content that is more in keeping with a sense of values that are more appropriate to the culture of the country. France restricts the foreign content of TV why can't we.I know there are certain taxes on programming from overseas ostensibly to help with local productions. It is a step in the right direction but the objectives seem more to be fundraising not regulation of content.
I am not advocating censorship, just a level of responsible content reflecting core values we would like people to adopt bearing in mind the incredible power of TV on the viewer who is not sceptical, sophisticated and very malleable.
Like I said, one of my neighbors got an electricity connection two months ago, the first thing they did was to go to Abans and buy a flat screen TV (not LCD) on which they have to make monthly payments for 36 months.
Prior to TV those especially in villages were immune from the outside world and appeared to live in a more contented life. I do not advocate a return to that time. Once TV arrived, many people who were not aware of how others lived, reasoned that they are poor. So their perception was that they are poor and that was something not good and someone should try and improve their situation. They could not afford the soap on the TV or the other gadgets advertised as must have items so they were poor.
Along with TV came the travelling salesman from the electronics companies. They sold refrigerators to the villages based on the low payment plans, but for extended periods, not really explaining the APR on the hire purchase plan. One of my neighbors has a double door fridge. They have to make monthly payments of about Rs 1500/-. The head of household is a small farmer who finds it hard to make ends meet. His wife cooks all three meals fresh with a large helping of rice. The fridge is only used to cool water, and otherwise it is empty. He complained that his electricity bill rose by over Rs 700/- a month as a result. I told him to fill the fridge with bottles of water to reduce power consumption.
I digress from the point I was trying to illustrate. With little entertainment in the village, and a lack of books to read, watching tv is the pastime in the evenings till bed time. It is fair to say that soaps are the most popular and many of them are canned Indian soaps that are dubbed to Sinhala. The life style of the soaps are those that are admired. They involve a lot of liberal lifestyles that are alien to the village and now seen as acceptable. There is no rational evaluation that this is just a foreign soap, and therefore the benefit of the entertainment aspect is outweighed by the examples of living that draw people from villages to cities.
I believe that a code of ethics be set up after a study of the problem, to give a better content that is more in keeping with a sense of values that are more appropriate to the culture of the country. France restricts the foreign content of TV why can't we.I know there are certain taxes on programming from overseas ostensibly to help with local productions. It is a step in the right direction but the objectives seem more to be fundraising not regulation of content.
I am not advocating censorship, just a level of responsible content reflecting core values we would like people to adopt bearing in mind the incredible power of TV on the viewer who is not sceptical, sophisticated and very malleable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)