1) Institution: the impact of Google on the newspaper industry
2) Ofcom report: how news consumption has changed
3) The future of newspapers: Build The Wall analysis
4) The decline of newspapers: the effect of online technology
5) The future of journalism: John Oliver and Clay Shirky
6) The decline of newspapers: Media Magazine case studies
7) Citizen journalism and hyper-reality: Media Magazine article and questions
8) News Values: theory and updating them for digital media landcape
9) Marxism & Pluralism: Media Magazine article and questions
10) Alain de Botton on the News: lecture and questions
11) Full NDM essay including paragraphs on Marxism and Pluralism
12) Globalisation and news: cultural imperialism
13) Globalisation: taking it further (Google Glass case study and capitalism)
14) Fake news and globalisation - Guardian and New York Times articles
15) News on the Tweet
Monday 12 December 2016
Sunday 11 December 2016
Globalisation: taking it further
1.Why was Google Glass controversial?
It simply eroded their privacy. This is a major issue as the development in new and digital media has meant that our lives are being exposed to anyone and everyone whether we decide to do this or not. There are always third parties ready to pounce of people (customers) to understand their tastes and preferences so these businesses can market to a wider range of people. So people are afraid that the Google Glasses will record them in the privacy of their own homes revealing certain things that other businesses like Samsung or Nike would want to know about their customers. Therefore, this information would then be sold onto other institutions (third parties) giving them more power over audiences.
2. What are the positive elements to Globalisation that the article highlights?
It has given audiences more power when considering the resources they have. The internet is the main element that has helped increased globalisation because of the resources on there that audiences can access for free. The famous search engine 'Google' has certainly been a significant factor for the rise in globalisation as it brings all information popular sites together and usually on the first page which makes it user friendly.
3. What are potential negatives to globalisation?
Americanisation. Cultural imperialism has been a factor that people are worried about in their society. They don't want other cultures changing their own ones just like how the American culture is being forced upon the World. This is because of the development in digital media which has given many people from America the power to share their views, values and behaviour through social media specifically. As English is the most spoken language and America has a bigger population than those countries who dominantly speak English its much easier for them to communicate more of their ideologies to the whole World.
4. What is a techno-panic? How does it link to moral panics?
Techno panic is where people are worried at the prospect of technology invading their privacy. This links to moral panic because people are concerned on the impact technology will have on society.
5. What is your opinion on the privacy debate and major corporations being able to access large quantities of personal data?
I believe this is the consequence we have to accept if we want the internet to continue to develop. It will constantly be requesting our personal details as we decide to make transactions online rather than in store which means our details are threat of hackers or businesses.
Media factsheet: Globalisation and capitalism
1. Who continued the phrase 'a global village' and what multinational companies illustrate this?
Marshall McLuhan was the person who created the idea that we have a global village. The idea tells us that countries become interconnected and independent when considering the economy (BBC).
2. What role does Slavoj Zizek suggest the media plays in global capitalism? How can you link this to our previous work on Marxism and Hegemony?
First of all capitalism is where the country is controlled by private institutions and tend to exclude themselves from other countries. Slavoj suggests that globalisation has effected the media as countries are being less strict with the news, views and ideologies they receive from other countries.
3. What does 'capitalism with a conscience' mean?
The idea that the goods or services we buy can reflect our lifestyles, personalities and values.
4. What is the (PRODUCT) RED campaign?
A private sector company that works as a charity to help those in Africa suffering from aids. An institution like Nike is working in Africa which would not only help the country but the brand image of Nike as they are seen as moral as they are doing ethical work.
5. Based on what you've read in the Factsheet, what is YOUR opinion of the (PRODUCT) RED brand? Is it a positive force helping to fight AIDS in Africa or a cynical attempt to make multinational companies look more ethical than they actually are?
At the end of the day, Africa are benefiting from the investments Nike and other firms are making whilst they increase their brand image. So both of them are benefiting from (PRODUCT) RED. I do believe these firms are doing this to help their brand images for sure because they are facing high costs doing this in the short term.
It simply eroded their privacy. This is a major issue as the development in new and digital media has meant that our lives are being exposed to anyone and everyone whether we decide to do this or not. There are always third parties ready to pounce of people (customers) to understand their tastes and preferences so these businesses can market to a wider range of people. So people are afraid that the Google Glasses will record them in the privacy of their own homes revealing certain things that other businesses like Samsung or Nike would want to know about their customers. Therefore, this information would then be sold onto other institutions (third parties) giving them more power over audiences.
2. What are the positive elements to Globalisation that the article highlights?
It has given audiences more power when considering the resources they have. The internet is the main element that has helped increased globalisation because of the resources on there that audiences can access for free. The famous search engine 'Google' has certainly been a significant factor for the rise in globalisation as it brings all information popular sites together and usually on the first page which makes it user friendly.
3. What are potential negatives to globalisation?
Americanisation. Cultural imperialism has been a factor that people are worried about in their society. They don't want other cultures changing their own ones just like how the American culture is being forced upon the World. This is because of the development in digital media which has given many people from America the power to share their views, values and behaviour through social media specifically. As English is the most spoken language and America has a bigger population than those countries who dominantly speak English its much easier for them to communicate more of their ideologies to the whole World.
4. What is a techno-panic? How does it link to moral panics?
Techno panic is where people are worried at the prospect of technology invading their privacy. This links to moral panic because people are concerned on the impact technology will have on society.
5. What is your opinion on the privacy debate and major corporations being able to access large quantities of personal data?
I believe this is the consequence we have to accept if we want the internet to continue to develop. It will constantly be requesting our personal details as we decide to make transactions online rather than in store which means our details are threat of hackers or businesses.
Media factsheet: Globalisation and capitalism
1. Who continued the phrase 'a global village' and what multinational companies illustrate this?
Marshall McLuhan was the person who created the idea that we have a global village. The idea tells us that countries become interconnected and independent when considering the economy (BBC).
2. What role does Slavoj Zizek suggest the media plays in global capitalism? How can you link this to our previous work on Marxism and Hegemony?
First of all capitalism is where the country is controlled by private institutions and tend to exclude themselves from other countries. Slavoj suggests that globalisation has effected the media as countries are being less strict with the news, views and ideologies they receive from other countries.
3. What does 'capitalism with a conscience' mean?
The idea that the goods or services we buy can reflect our lifestyles, personalities and values.
4. What is the (PRODUCT) RED campaign?
A private sector company that works as a charity to help those in Africa suffering from aids. An institution like Nike is working in Africa which would not only help the country but the brand image of Nike as they are seen as moral as they are doing ethical work.
5. Based on what you've read in the Factsheet, what is YOUR opinion of the (PRODUCT) RED brand? Is it a positive force helping to fight AIDS in Africa or a cynical attempt to make multinational companies look more ethical than they actually are?
At the end of the day, Africa are benefiting from the investments Nike and other firms are making whilst they increase their brand image. So both of them are benefiting from (PRODUCT) RED. I do believe these firms are doing this to help their brand images for sure because they are facing high costs doing this in the short term.
Friday 9 December 2016
LR: essay
The development of new/digital media means the audience is more powerful in terms of consumption and production. Discuss the arguments for and against this view.
WWW: There is some absolutely brilliant content in this essay – I really enjoyed reading it. Marxism and Pluralism are obviously strengths here but it’s great to see a variety of examples and also you’ve attempted to use some quotes. There are a few areas to work on but overall this should provide the platform for an excellent A2 grade!
WWW: There is some absolutely brilliant content in this essay – I really enjoyed reading it. Marxism and Pluralism are obviously strengths here but it’s great to see a variety of examples and also you’ve attempted to use some quotes. There are a few areas to work on but overall this should provide the platform for an excellent A2 grade!
EBI: The absolutely crucial feedback is to always answer
the question. You discuss empowerment throughout but you hardly ever use the
key words from the question: consumption and production. You need to make sure
every paragraph begins with a topic sentence that uses the wording from the
question – show the examiner that ‘sharp focus’ on the question demanded by the
mark scheme.
Although you raise lots of interesting points, there’s
also a huge amount we’ve learned this term that you’ve missed: the decline of
newspapers, how news consumption has changed (Ofcom report), paywalls and the
future of journalism, hyperreality and UGC, news values etc. There is so much
more you can do!
As above, your introduction does not clearly answer the
question (use the wording from the question here). You also need to clearly
introduce your case study in your introduction (impact of NDM on news).
In terms of your essay writing, Written English still
needs to improve. Did you proofread this essay? Too many errors in written
communication and this will cost you at the top level. In addition, you need to
learn how to clearly introduce or embed quotes to support your views.
Finally, organisation and paragraph construction are two
other areas to work on. Make sure you have a clear topic sentence at the start
of every paragraph that uses the wording from the question (“consumption and
production”) and tells the reader what specific aspect the paragraph will be
focusing on.
LR: Create a list of key revision topics from our new/digital
case study work this term based on your essay and feedback above. Revise these
topics over Christmas for your January MEST3 Section B assessment.
Write at least one more well-developed paragraph on the
question above as part of your revision.
Key topics for revision:
- The decline in newspapers
- The decline in journalism
- The changes in consumption of news (refer back to articles and notes from lesson)
- Paywalls and the future of journalism
- User Generated Content (thoroughly discuss its impact - link to as many threats as possible)
- News values (for example the internet has allowed for quicker news - immediacy)
- Globalisation (Americanisation of media)
- Fake news
- Refer back to New and Digital Media
Key points of reflection:
- Proof read
- Answer the question
- Always start a new paragraph with the topic question
- Need to improve on embedding quotes in the right places
- Need more media terminology
The development of new/digital media means the audience is more powerful in terms of consumption and production. Discuss the arguments for and against this view.
A Marxist's perspective of would argue that audiences have been made to believe they are in control of what they view when in fact, institutions are the real ones with the authority and its the journalists who able to carefully construct news stories to reinforce dominant ideologies of dominant classes in society. Its the mass media who 'reproduce the status quo' and constantly produce and force their ideologies upon all audiences which would ensure that the powerful people remain in this position whilst those in lower classes aren't able to speak for themselves. This would mean that dominant cultures are being being firmly positioned in more countries of the methods they use to get a wider range of audiences. So long as audiences continue to consume news from these large news corporates, they will be able to have power over audiences. For example, The Sun's registration as an official leave campaign group for Brexit would have definitely influenced votes of the public especially because some of the news was fake meaning it would be more likely to reinforce certain ideologies (usually dominant). The internet is an example where news institutions can expand their dominance when considering how they influence people's ideologies because it used across different countries. This links to globalisation as news institutions consider operating in other countries to force their views and values on others (cultural imperialism).Therefore journalism may not be at risk in the future as people will still be relying on news institutions to get their news as it provides them with news being told from the perspective they want it from. Despite this I don't believe Marxists would be blind of the profitable opportunity they could pounce on with paywalls for online articles as long as 'a fair price can be charged' (Rupert Murdoch) I believe audiences would be willing to pay for these subscriptions.
A Marxist's perspective of would argue that audiences have been made to believe they are in control of what they view when in fact, institutions are the real ones with the authority and its the journalists who able to carefully construct news stories to reinforce dominant ideologies of dominant classes in society. Its the mass media who 'reproduce the status quo' and constantly produce and force their ideologies upon all audiences which would ensure that the powerful people remain in this position whilst those in lower classes aren't able to speak for themselves. This would mean that dominant cultures are being being firmly positioned in more countries of the methods they use to get a wider range of audiences. So long as audiences continue to consume news from these large news corporates, they will be able to have power over audiences. For example, The Sun's registration as an official leave campaign group for Brexit would have definitely influenced votes of the public especially because some of the news was fake meaning it would be more likely to reinforce certain ideologies (usually dominant). The internet is an example where news institutions can expand their dominance when considering how they influence people's ideologies because it used across different countries. This links to globalisation as news institutions consider operating in other countries to force their views and values on others (cultural imperialism).Therefore journalism may not be at risk in the future as people will still be relying on news institutions to get their news as it provides them with news being told from the perspective they want it from. Despite this I don't believe Marxists would be blind of the profitable opportunity they could pounce on with paywalls for online articles as long as 'a fair price can be charged' (Rupert Murdoch) I believe audiences would be willing to pay for these subscriptions.
NDM: Facebook copying Snapchat
This is getting silly now: Facebook is copying another Snapchat feature
Facebook has copied another feature from Snapchat. This hasn't been the first time they have tried this because we have seen them have two clones of the Snapchat stories, two attempted acquisitions, four standalone apps, two ephemeral messaging implementations and three cameras with AR lenses. Facebook has now tried its attack again on the ephemeral messaging app: custom geofilters. Thye have called it 'frames'. It allows the user to implement their geographical location using funky texts.
I believe Facebook are abusing their power in the market because they can be seen as a monopoly in the industry. Instagram (Facebook controlled) has also got some features in its application which has be stolen from Snapchat. It seems Snapchat are being victimised without them being able to fight back. They are just hoping their audience won't get bored with their app otherwise they will be in trouble of losing the business as a whole.
NDM: The Sun and Brexit
The Sun registered as an official Leave campaign group and spent £96,000 on Brexit campaigning
The article discusses The Sun's operation to support Britain of leaving the EU. The institution spent £90,000 campaigning as a leave group during the EU referendum electoral spending documents have suggested. This was discovered back in June a week before polling day. The rest of the article briefly discusses Rupert Murdoch and his influence on news.
I believe that news institutions can have a significant influence on its audience and it could be argued that it some results could have changed because of the different ideologies being portrayed to its audience. It doesn't specify the platform their audience had obtained news so we can't conclude whether newspapers are still in effect.
Monday 5 December 2016
NDM news: Globalisation
Is our news influenced by American cultural imperialism? Give some examples arguing for or against this perspective.
British culture, to be precise, along with the other cultures has certainly been 'Americanised'. This is because of the ways America portray their culture with the media content they constantly produce which includes films television shows and the news. If we consider the US election and the reactions of people around the World, it can be suggested that people have become fond of their culture. The UK's reaction on social media supports this as they expressed their emotions as the result of the election was announced in November. Unlike the decision for the UK to leave the EU, the World didn't act surprised in any way. This is evident through the activity in social media through the days and weeks of the announcement where only Europeans reacted even-though it could affect the World (e.g trade). Therefore, I do believe America's culture has definitely been forced upon us without our consent and people have accepted it and are mimicking their behaviours. However, we could argue that audiences are active uses of media so they aren't as brain-dead as the effects theory implies. Audiences may now have a better understanding of the American culture because of the content of theirs being transferred to other countries but it doesn't mean they will completely adapt/consume their behaviours and values.
Has the increased globalisation of news improved the audience experience? How? Why?
We could argue that moral panics have been increased as audiences are able to unravel more surprising news stories from around the World. The development in digital media has meant that audiences have easier access to news so can challenge their views and values with the numerous news stories there are online. For example, for British audiences watching/reading news about the immigrants fleeing their deprived countries may be concerned about their position in the country and the effect an increase in the population will have on the nation's politics, economics and social lifestyles. Therefore, the experience the audience receives here may be a shock to them but it would give them more information and a reality check of the situation in Europe now. News that would be able to go global would be on social media and foreign news websites. This would give them more access to all types of news from a different perspective on the immigrant issue which would be a better experience for audiences as they are able to form an opinion based on a balanced story. However, it would all depend on the amount of research audiences are willing to do to be able to reinforce and/or challenge ideologies.
Has globalisation benefited or damaged major news institutions? How? Why?
I would argue that it has mainly damaged large news institutions as audience's power is gradually increasing because of the development in new and digital media. An example of where audiences have become powerful is with citizen journalism which is where audiences can report on news events which they have witnessed or recorded using photos or video. This evidence of an event would not be able to be recorded by news institutions because they would be less likely to witness something occur compared to the rest of the World. Once its recorded it would make its way onto the internet where it would become viral. Therefore, audiences view it on social media and wouldn't care to read the actual journalists report of the event as the live raw footage would have been enough. This is why journalism is at risk of becoming extinct because the public are able to do the most important parts of their job. However, it provides these institutions with footage for their audience to watch on television which makes them feel more connected to the story because its an actual recording of an event. Despite this, the person who recorded the event could have manipulated the content or audiences may look past certain things in the footage to reinforce their ideologies. The decline in newspapers could both benefit and damage news institutions. It could damage them because audiences may go to people on social media or blogs for news. But the institutions could evaluate and assess these committed bloggers and could offer them jobs for online journalism which would improve recruitment. So costs could be lowered especially because some of the bloggers may not have a degree for journalism and the audience from the blogger can be transferred to the news institution.
British culture, to be precise, along with the other cultures has certainly been 'Americanised'. This is because of the ways America portray their culture with the media content they constantly produce which includes films television shows and the news. If we consider the US election and the reactions of people around the World, it can be suggested that people have become fond of their culture. The UK's reaction on social media supports this as they expressed their emotions as the result of the election was announced in November. Unlike the decision for the UK to leave the EU, the World didn't act surprised in any way. This is evident through the activity in social media through the days and weeks of the announcement where only Europeans reacted even-though it could affect the World (e.g trade). Therefore, I do believe America's culture has definitely been forced upon us without our consent and people have accepted it and are mimicking their behaviours. However, we could argue that audiences are active uses of media so they aren't as brain-dead as the effects theory implies. Audiences may now have a better understanding of the American culture because of the content of theirs being transferred to other countries but it doesn't mean they will completely adapt/consume their behaviours and values.
Has the increased globalisation of news improved the audience experience? How? Why?
We could argue that moral panics have been increased as audiences are able to unravel more surprising news stories from around the World. The development in digital media has meant that audiences have easier access to news so can challenge their views and values with the numerous news stories there are online. For example, for British audiences watching/reading news about the immigrants fleeing their deprived countries may be concerned about their position in the country and the effect an increase in the population will have on the nation's politics, economics and social lifestyles. Therefore, the experience the audience receives here may be a shock to them but it would give them more information and a reality check of the situation in Europe now. News that would be able to go global would be on social media and foreign news websites. This would give them more access to all types of news from a different perspective on the immigrant issue which would be a better experience for audiences as they are able to form an opinion based on a balanced story. However, it would all depend on the amount of research audiences are willing to do to be able to reinforce and/or challenge ideologies.
Has globalisation benefited or damaged major news institutions? How? Why?
I would argue that it has mainly damaged large news institutions as audience's power is gradually increasing because of the development in new and digital media. An example of where audiences have become powerful is with citizen journalism which is where audiences can report on news events which they have witnessed or recorded using photos or video. This evidence of an event would not be able to be recorded by news institutions because they would be less likely to witness something occur compared to the rest of the World. Once its recorded it would make its way onto the internet where it would become viral. Therefore, audiences view it on social media and wouldn't care to read the actual journalists report of the event as the live raw footage would have been enough. This is why journalism is at risk of becoming extinct because the public are able to do the most important parts of their job. However, it provides these institutions with footage for their audience to watch on television which makes them feel more connected to the story because its an actual recording of an event. Despite this, the person who recorded the event could have manipulated the content or audiences may look past certain things in the footage to reinforce their ideologies. The decline in newspapers could both benefit and damage news institutions. It could damage them because audiences may go to people on social media or blogs for news. But the institutions could evaluate and assess these committed bloggers and could offer them jobs for online journalism which would improve recruitment. So costs could be lowered especially because some of the bloggers may not have a degree for journalism and the audience from the blogger can be transferred to the news institution.
Friday 2 December 2016
NDM: regulating teens online
No Jeremy Hunt, you can't use tech to ban sexting for the under 18s
This article is about the action Jeremy Hunt wants to take in order to reduce cyber-bullying. They want social media and tech companies to ban sexting as a whole which could potentially reduce some part of cyber-bullying. He would rather the responsibility of our children's well-being would be in the hands of IT professionals in America instead of the British Government. He says, 'There is a lot of evidence that the technology industry, if they put their mind to it, can do really smart things'. The article does understand the views of Jeremy Hunt but it is a bit wild to consider how anyone would be able to spy on young people of Britain for 24 hours. Also, it would be difficult to regulate some of the pictures not only may it not be accurate but it would need to analyse the picture taken quickly so the immediacy isn't taken away from certain websites (snapchat or Twitter).
I agree with Jeremy Hunt to an extent as a regulation system used on social media could reduce cyber-bullying by a bit because wouldn't be seen naked. However, this would be difficult for organisations to do as there are millions of people in the country so it babysitting the nation will take time. real time regulation specifically is the hardest as people want to communicate as quick as possible and this 'gatekeeping' system will slow down communication.
Thursday 1 December 2016
Essay
The development of new/digital media means the audience is more powerful
in terms of consumption and production. Discuss the arguments for and against
this view.
The development of new and digital media could be argued
that audiences are becoming less reliant on news institutions and more dependent
on other sources of obtaining news. People are sharing their opinions and
values through social media and blogs which have blossomed in the past few
years but it’s where they get their information from and who influences them to
become public figures. It’s the perspective of pluralists and Marxists that I
will decipher in the essay to understand the difference in ideologies when arguing
for or against the amount of power audiences have.
This statement would certainly be approved by pluralists as
audiences have now been given the opportunity to choose the media content they
want to view rather than news institutes forcing particular mediated news
stories to them. As James Halloran suggested audiences now have the ability to
subvert their views and values ‘conform, accommodate, challenge or reject’ with
the wide range of news sources at disposal which new/digital technologies have
provided them. For example, the development of social media over the years has
allowed audiences to interact with one another by posting footage of events and
challenge ideologies which would give people a different perspective of political
stories like police brutality instead of right wing news institutions (Daily
Mail) portraying these unfortunate black victims as criminals when that may not
be the case. Pluralists would argue that social media has allowed groups of
people to form as a unit to begin public announces and awareness like the ‘Black Lives Matter’ campaign which has
definitely given audiences power amongst the giant media institutes as it has
influenced people’s ideologies and their confidence to stand up for their
rights/freedom of speech ‘the internet is an empowering tool’ – Rupert Murdoch.
Especially because of the citizen journalism we see on social networking sites
like Twitter, Instagram or Facebook which news institutes would revert back to
so they can obtain footage of the news story depending on their target
audience’s political views. This challenges the views of Marxists as Herman and
Mchesney’s views on the internet are utterly different ‘the internet and
digital revolution do not pose an immediate or even foreseeable threat to the
market power of the media giants’ as it seems some audiences have overcome the
feeling of being prisoners of these news organisations as they are gradually
becoming more dependent on news on social media. So this is where a moral panic has been created with the threat of journalism becoming extinct as citizen journalism's popularity rises.
Marxists would believe pluralists overestimate the
significance of technology as it hasn’t really affected the position of giant
news institutes who want to reinforce their audience’s ideologies. Although
digital media has been introduced, it hasn’t (completely) reduced the power of
elite news institutes as Pareto’s Law informs us ‘a minority of (media)
producers always serve a majority of consumers’. So audiences are still more dependent on news
institutes over other sources on the internet which could be because they have
more trust with news because they are organisations with pledges which are
regulated by gatekeepers. However, the ability to identify what is real or fake
could depend on the age of the audience as Livingston/Bober states ‘38% of UK
pupils aged 9-19 never question the accuracy of online information’. The fact
that some ‘never’ challenge the information online could be manipulated by news
institutes like Fox or Daily Mail to suggest audiences would be better off
obtaining news from them. Therefore, giant news institutions can maintain their
power and forward their hegemonic views amongst audiences and as the hypodermic
needle model suggests audiences believe what they are told by the media
(surprisingly similar to young audience with information online). Considering the thoughts of
Mark Zuckerberg he believes fake news is becoming a problem with people and
their values and has pledged to do his most to cut down on the issue on
Facebook. So as long as people view the internet as a place full of jargon news
then media giants will always be positioned at number one with audiences being
fully dependent on them for daily news (effects theory – spoon feeding
audience). Therefore, it would seem journalism in the future may not be at risk because the public will still demand stories from them as they provide more important and relevant news like accountability journalism with the Washington post.
A pluralist’s perspective would argue that new and digital
media has given/increased people’s ‘freedom of speech’ which can be used to
challenge each other’s views and values. When considering the production of
media content, we can see the amount of ways any ordinary person can create and/or
publish news on the internet. The use of blogs is a method used by many
individuals who care to share their opinions and videos of recent events. This
covers the uses and gratification theory when considering the ways audiences
have been able to utilise the elements of the theory to construct news. For
example, audiences may produce it as they want to educate people on certain
news stories but people who consume it will use it to be educated – both of
which are surveillance element. This means that audiences are active users of
the media so have some influence with the content they will view which is
evident with Brexit and the US election with the use of social media and blogs holding
numerous rants and debates. Furthermore, audiences aren’t seen as powerless because
of the fact that they are now showing their ability to form opinions and
discussions randomly so aren’t as gullible or reliant on the media as Marxists
and effects theory suggests. ‘audiences are seen as capable of manipulating the
media in an infinite variety of ways’ which emphasises the
views of pluralists because it implies audiences are now able to unravel more
information about a particular news story because of the development in new and
digital media.
In conclusion, it seems evident that audiences are still
heavily reliant on news institutions (especially large ones) when obtaining
news. Although they do have some control of the media and the content they want
to view, it is the media that make people believe they have power. So once
giant media institutions get hold of media content, it can be mediated first
and then given to audiences on the internet making them believe they have authority
of what they want to see when surfacing online for information. Therefore, I
side with Marxists as giant news institutions are still the most powerful and
will overcome audiences as people are too dependent on them and won’t ever
neglect them.
Possible
consideration:
Fake news is gradually getting regulated
News on social media may be abstracted from news websites or
links
Media giants still controlling what is really revealed even
when there is footage sometimes
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)