Monday, May 09, 2005
No longer a Fourth Estate
No longer is there a Fourth Estate. Instead we see the press being co-opted as part of the Exceutive Branch of government. According to Frank Rich ("Laura Bush's Mission Accomplished." New York Times, May 8, 2005), the White House press has become the public relations' arm of the executive branch. Reporting of Laura Bush's performance at the annual White House Correspondents' Association dinner is a case in point. Mrs. Bush did a marvelous job following her scripted lines, but they were just that - someone else's writing. The problem is that the press bought into the "burlesque" routine and even promoted it.
This is typical of the way the press has reported the White House, says Rich. Reviews of the President's "top gun" performance two years ago on the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln were "reminiscent" of the reporting of the White House Correspondents' gala. The problem two years ago was that the President was claiming the war in Iraq was over and the press was buying into "the big sell." According to Rich, the administration has become masterful at "erecting propagandistic virtual realties that the news media have often been either tardy or ineffectual at unmasking." Such was the case with the false "town hall meetings," hiring Armstrong Williams to support its policies, and even the placing of Jeff Gannan, a Republican Party hack into the White House press corps. In that case, it took the press corps two years to report who Gannan really was.
The role of the media should be one of presenting alternative voices and views. Their failure to present opposite viewpoints about going to war in Iraq is an example of where their capitulation to the government line has tragically cost the U.S. in over 1500 dead, billions of dollars squandered, and its reputation even further tarnished. The war has spawned more terrorism and killed many thousands of innocent Iraqis. Whether there will be a democratic form of government is still in doubt. And unless the media do their job, the willful negligence of the press in reporting government may still bring about greater harm to our representative democracy.
This is typical of the way the press has reported the White House, says Rich. Reviews of the President's "top gun" performance two years ago on the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln were "reminiscent" of the reporting of the White House Correspondents' gala. The problem two years ago was that the President was claiming the war in Iraq was over and the press was buying into "the big sell." According to Rich, the administration has become masterful at "erecting propagandistic virtual realties that the news media have often been either tardy or ineffectual at unmasking." Such was the case with the false "town hall meetings," hiring Armstrong Williams to support its policies, and even the placing of Jeff Gannan, a Republican Party hack into the White House press corps. In that case, it took the press corps two years to report who Gannan really was.
The role of the media should be one of presenting alternative voices and views. Their failure to present opposite viewpoints about going to war in Iraq is an example of where their capitulation to the government line has tragically cost the U.S. in over 1500 dead, billions of dollars squandered, and its reputation even further tarnished. The war has spawned more terrorism and killed many thousands of innocent Iraqis. Whether there will be a democratic form of government is still in doubt. And unless the media do their job, the willful negligence of the press in reporting government may still bring about greater harm to our representative democracy.
Want to raise your IQ? Try being a parent.
When a satirical Web site posted a "study" saying that parents lose an average of 20 I.Q. points on the birth of their first child, MSNBC broadcast it as if it were true. This perception is a common view of many people who think that anyone who becomes a parent must be "brain dead." The opposite is true, according to Katherine Ellison ("This is Your Brain on Motherhood." New York Times, May 8, 2005). Because children challenge parents, "raising children is actually mentally enriching for mothers - and fathers."
My concern is that such perceptions should even exist, let alone be perpetuated by the media. This negativity about motherhood, says Ellison, comes in part because we live in a time when "intimacy of all sorts is on the decline in this country," close extended families are passé, the marriage rate has declined, and a record percentage of women choose to be childless. We no longer have time to maintain friendships, because "real relationships take a lot of time and work - it's much more convenient to keep in touch by e-mail." Successfully rearing children, on the other hand, requires that we develop relationships. In the process, parents "grow, acquire wisdom and become more fully human." That in itself should recommend parenthood.
My concern is that such perceptions should even exist, let alone be perpetuated by the media. This negativity about motherhood, says Ellison, comes in part because we live in a time when "intimacy of all sorts is on the decline in this country," close extended families are passé, the marriage rate has declined, and a record percentage of women choose to be childless. We no longer have time to maintain friendships, because "real relationships take a lot of time and work - it's much more convenient to keep in touch by e-mail." Successfully rearing children, on the other hand, requires that we develop relationships. In the process, parents "grow, acquire wisdom and become more fully human." That in itself should recommend parenthood.
Friday, May 06, 2005
Use of corporate jets a common practice
Politicians use of corporate jets for travel is a common practice that is not unlawful. But it should be.
The Washington Post (R. Jeffrey Smith and Derek Willis. 2005, May 5. Hill Leaders Often Take Corporate Jets: Companies Offer Discount Flights and Gain Access. Washington Post, p. A01. Retrieved May 6, 2005 from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/04/AR2005050402393.html) reports that all 12 present and former House and Senate leaders have flown for free on corporate jets in the past four years. The leading frequent flyers are House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.).
How can legislators consider neutrally bills that affect the national interest and still accept favors from the corporate giants? The answer is that they can't. Most decisions are likely made with one eye on their corporate sponsors.
German philosopher Jürgen Habermas distinguishes between the public sphere and the system. The system includes the state and market forces. In order for the public to influence government operations its voice must be heard above the voice of market forces. For Habermas, the public is a literate civil society, represented by public opinion. Public opinion is formed through critical public debate among equals, made possible by the press (Jürgen Habermas in The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, p 24). However, public debate is diminished as the press becomes more and more a part of the market system. And, as politicians are influenced more by corporate interests than public opinion, representative democracy is in peril.
The Washington Post (R. Jeffrey Smith and Derek Willis. 2005, May 5. Hill Leaders Often Take Corporate Jets: Companies Offer Discount Flights and Gain Access. Washington Post, p. A01. Retrieved May 6, 2005 from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/04/AR2005050402393.html) reports that all 12 present and former House and Senate leaders have flown for free on corporate jets in the past four years. The leading frequent flyers are House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.).
How can legislators consider neutrally bills that affect the national interest and still accept favors from the corporate giants? The answer is that they can't. Most decisions are likely made with one eye on their corporate sponsors.
German philosopher Jürgen Habermas distinguishes between the public sphere and the system. The system includes the state and market forces. In order for the public to influence government operations its voice must be heard above the voice of market forces. For Habermas, the public is a literate civil society, represented by public opinion. Public opinion is formed through critical public debate among equals, made possible by the press (Jürgen Habermas in The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, p 24). However, public debate is diminished as the press becomes more and more a part of the market system. And, as politicians are influenced more by corporate interests than public opinion, representative democracy is in peril.
Wednesday, May 04, 2005
The latest news brought to you on your cell phone
As newspaper circulations continue to fall (NPR, May3, 2005, <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4628368>), mobile phones seem to be the medium of the future. They may be replacing the newspaper (and TV and radio) as the favorite place among the younger set for getting news and entertainment (NPR, May 2, 2005, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4626860). Fox is producing mobile phone sized TV shows (mobisodes) . Imagine TV episodes in 60 seconds. Cell phone users also can listen to their favorite music. A company called Informa is among those providing entertainment content. Young people are driving the market. For them media are a"snack rather than a full meal." Young people get tid bits from the mobile medium and this seems to fulfill their information needs.
Tuesday, May 03, 2005
Misuse and abuse of Video News Releases
NPR reports that "as resources have shrunk and profit pressures increased for TV newsrooms, some have chosen to take questionable shortcuts. Among them, the unattributed use of VNRs -- video news releases." VNRs produced by government agencies have gotten recent attention in newspapers. VNRs also are being produced by large corporations in an effort to "shape" the news. <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4561627>
To compete with cable, many local stations are broadcasting VNRs without indicating the source. Many of these have been produced by government agencies and they appear in every way to be legitimate news features produced by news people. This phenomenon is being reported as if it is new and unique to the Bush administration. However, the use of radio and video news releases started during the 1980s, when "PR firms discovered that they could film, edit and produce their own news segments - even entire programs - and that broadcasters would play the segments as "news," often with no editing." (See John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton. Toxic Sludge Is Good For You: Lies, Damn Lies and the Public Relations Industry. Retrieved May 3, 2005 from http://www.prwatch.org/node/3518.)
An example is the release March 14, 2005 of a State Department produced news segment. In the news video, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announces the nominations of Karen P. Hughes as under secretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs and Dina Powell as assistant secretary of state for educational and cultural affairs. The VNR aired on many broadcast stations without any recognition that it was made by the State Department. This contravenes Journalism ethics and good news practice. (Retrieved May 3, 2005 from the News Market.)
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
