tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4296942054147310421.post3759125290600351744..comments2021-08-24T23:11:23.558-05:00Comments on LIS 661: Information Ethics and Policy: the death of newspapersSarah. R.http://www.blogger.com/profile/13495338005089494192noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4296942054147310421.post-7583216568498116752010-10-27T19:02:32.213-05:002010-10-27T19:02:32.213-05:00On the subject of media giants and their ability t...On the subject of media giants and their ability to shape the political landscape, <a href="http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=506E9A42-0184-3BF7-6F2F8D12EC95F5F3" rel="nofollow">Politico</a> recently noted that nearly every potential GOP candidate for the presidency in 2012 (with the exception of Mitt Romney) is on the Fox News payroll - raising questions as to how Fox intends to offer "fair and balanced" campaign coverage of its own employees, or how other news networks can cover these candidates when they're contractually forbidden from appearing on networks other than Fox.<br /><br />Paul Krugman wrote an interesting <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/04/opinion/04krugman.html?_r=3&ref=opinion" rel="nofollow">op-ed piece</a> for the New York Times (for what it's worth, I read it, like most of my newspapers, online) in which he noted that while media moguls like Fox's Rupert Murdoch have always attempted to influence political races with their financial backing, the act of publicly putting the candidates on the company payroll takes things to a whole new level. As Krugman writes, "the Ministry of Propaganda has, in effect, seized control of the Politburo."Frederick Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17291284255670026861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4296942054147310421.post-86451395351833412052010-10-26T15:50:54.755-05:002010-10-26T15:50:54.755-05:00Diana - your last paragraph summarizes some of the...Diana - your last paragraph summarizes some of the conversations I have had with my peers in doctoral programs with regard to the notion of citizen journalism that responds to corporate lobbies (and personhood, per the recent Supreme Court ruling). One critique of the McChesney/Nichols position on this topic is that it assumes too much of a level playing field, so to speak, from which citizens are meant to act. Many take issue with this premise. A second critique comes from the fact that a lot of the rhetoric around responding in these ways is based on an individualism that many find problematic. Some have offered notions of collective responses as an alternative. Nevertheless, this work continues to shed the light on the dangerous ramifications of the lack of a free press. Yet a monolithic newspaper-based press may well be a thing of the past. I watched a Congressional hearing called by Sen. John Kerry on this issue, at which a major newspaper executive indicated that many in his industry were "waiting for the ground to settle" before devising their way-ahead strategy in the context of the digital media paradigm. The truth is that there may never again be settled ground, but rather a dynamic and shifting landscape in which only those who can be nimble and adapt their practices quickly will survive.Sarah. R.https://www.blogger.com/profile/13495338005089494192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4296942054147310421.post-43520346904086810092010-10-26T14:47:34.555-05:002010-10-26T14:47:34.555-05:00TV news definitely has become quite the beast. I r...TV news definitely has become quite the beast. I remember watching Good Night, Good Luck and thinking how Edward R. Murrow was a total badass. Granted that's a movie, but it probably does highlight the difference between then and now. It's true that "news" can happen anytime, but I don't think this justifies the 24-hour news networks existence. My favorite part of the frontline segments, was a quote from Ted Koppel along the lines of setting the standards for news as the same as entertainment was the worst move in the history of news broadcasting, giving people what then wanted instead of what was important. I had a very immediate reaction to this, on one hand the sentiment carries with it a certain degree of arrogance that Mr. Koppel somehow knows what I need to know and I can't figure it out for myself. On the other hand, he's right. It's Ted's job to discover the important facts in our nation/world and present them in a form we can consume in a half hour or hour. Then it comes down to finding someone or some organization you can trust enough to not lie to you. Sadly, it seems that the more popular people are also the ones that are engaged more in entertainment rather than information. That said, the only TV news I watch any more is Jim Lehrer who is probably the most boring/informative news man out there.Daniel J.https://www.blogger.com/profile/03379127710594166270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4296942054147310421.post-91777680312668843362010-10-25T23:40:41.078-05:002010-10-25T23:40:41.078-05:00Diana, I like your comment about news being
sensa...Diana, I like your comment about news being <br />sensationalized. I fully agree with you.<br /><br />I was watching the TV news coverage on the race for US congress (God I hate political news). The whole thing was 100% gossip. The new’s “expert” gave stats on who had the largest funding, who was expected to loose, and how badly/easily the Republicans would win over the house. There was no mentioning of platforms or issues or anything IMPORTANT. I mean, come on, how is this not bias? What purpose does this serve?<br /><br />To me, TV news is getting horrendous. No story is taken seriously anymore and it seems that each segment is so short they can’t give you enough information to show that they actually did any REAL research or journalism. I don’t know what the reason is, but, TV news has gotten bad. That’s why I go to the internet and steer clear from US news corporations. My thought is that because foreign news is not so much affiliated with American companies, they are able to paint a truer, less corrupt, picture of the things happening in our own country. And, most of the time our actions are not seen in a good light. But, that’s life.LibraryRPGamerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13721585353795044422noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4296942054147310421.post-615983119309747392010-10-25T23:21:05.040-05:002010-10-25T23:21:05.040-05:00As I sit and groan over attack ad after attack ad ...As I sit and groan over attack ad after attack ad after attack ad (many sponsored by various lobbyist groups), I couldn't agree with Diana more that any plan to revive the newspaper industry that doesn't account for the clout of corporations is not well researched. However, I think its pretty impossible to outbid the media giants who want to increase their profits by publishing online only.<br /><br />I think another consideration for any government funding for newspapers is the current economic state of governments across the US. And we as librarians should know just as well as anyone how cash-strapped governments are. So while newspapers are important to our culture, I think I would rather have my tax money spent on schools and fire departments than keeping newspapers afloat.Morganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06082711738960111463noreply@blogger.com