How should the media affect our world?
This post was contributed by Kookie Habtegaber of MediaChannel
The media has the most impact and attention in the North, where life is more or less impossible without telecommunication and digital connection. Since the population of this part of the world also has a monopoly on the world’s riches and resources one way or another, its media should use their position to create a constructive dialogue between different parts of the world. It should make the “masses aware” of how their action/lifestyle impacts the life of those across the globe, specifically those in the South. Here, I am not referring to churning out bad news after bad news; a war here, a disaster there, often without giving an in-depth analysis of the situation, but to showing the link, create awareness, and inform the public about issues that affect millions of lives on the bases of our interconnectedness.
Thus, it is not just about presenting the fact, but also the interpretation of the fact. For instance, how many news agencies who reported on the war in Congo also added the list of multinationals that concurrently operate in that same country extracting minerals? True, most people including myself can not do without our mobile phone these days, but if there would be a survey on whether people are willing to pay extra so that they know the coltan on their mobile phone connecting them to their loved ones is not at the same time depriving others the same opportunity across the globe, I am sure most people would be willing to accommodate; after all what is the point of believing in progress without the belief in the good will of people.
Media outlets of course get their funding from advertising, governments, and often are owned by private shareholders who have their own agenda and want a guarantee on their profit margin. Boards of directors, individual programmers, editors, commissions etc, all have an influence on how things are presented and on emphasis given to certain issues. The way one processes information, one’s personal belief, even at a subconscious level, leads to some level of subjectivity. As Nietzsche contended, no pure fact without interpretation could exist.
Yet many media outlets and journalists alike, claim to tell the truth and continue their rhetoric of objectivism and impartiality. If we take the case of public media, who are less likely to be biased, it should be acknowledged that at times the interest of the “country” will censor certain news analysis or affect the way it is presented. For example, the BBC is re-knowned for its accurate, impartial, objective and exhaustive reporting. Yet, should I have been critical of the BBC world radio (the only news outlet I had to get news at that time) for broadcasting hours after hours about the invasion of Iraq and the weapons used as if it was some kind of science fiction episode? Or does the BBC have an allegiance to British involvement, to protect the interest of Britain? Is the BBC’s mandate first and foremost to serve the British people and its government? After all, it is the British tax payer who is paying for it. The answer is to the latter is probably yes. Otherwise there would not be national media outlets in the first place. In reality, media outlets often will not cover all stories with the same vigor; some issues are more important than others, commercial interest lead to self-censorship and so forth. Therefore what is essential is that the directive and priorities of media outlets should be clear and honest even if this means acknowledging vested interests.
This is even more significant since globalization of the media and new sorts of communications has made information imperative and moved the role of the media to the center stage, influencing all aspects social life. Hence, why not use this leverage and try to make it the media’s (especially the public media) responsibility and duty to inform us and create awareness about how connected we really are. For instance, by putting the link between `why are we wealthy and they still poor¬¥, between political and economic decisions, by promoting discussions about consumerism and its impact on environmental degradation and persisting poverty. But, by also reporting about positive activities that are happening around the world; creating impetus for people to participate and get involved for advancing a better and just world.
This of course carries a bias towards a certain view of the world, promotes some issues more than others, but it is my opinion it should not be seen as undesirable. Once we have acknowledged that the media is not objective and will not cover all issues with the same weight and depth, perhaps then the media can play a constructive role towards a more even world. It can play a role in balancing the good and evil, it can help tip the balance towards the good for all. It might be in human nature to be selfish, but it is also in human nature to show solidarity. If this part of the world was to change places with the deprived part, perhaps the reactions would have been the same; sometimes indifferent and self-interest, and at times amity and involvement.
TAG: wemedia
Previous Comments
Media are the guardians of a public trust – we place our trust in media to give us the facts. It is from this public trust that they get the title of Fourth Estate, alongside politicians, and churchmen.
However, like all such trusts, it is based on the assumption of a limited commons. Only so many can afford the printing presses, studios and masts, or disc presses.
The Net is different. Already, poor communities are finding ways of using shared computer and fast wireless acess to publish. There is no post 1970 superstar photographer to match the sixties ones like Lord Lichfield, or David Bailey – we are all photographers now. Now that we all have mobiles with digital cameras in them, we are all news photographers too.
Even if Nietzsche’s contention, no pure fact without interpretation, is correct the best solution is to hear as many reports (a.k.a. opinions) as possible.
You might think that Big Media is not helping itself by being so obviously contemptuous of their public responsibility – their public trust. I, for one, wouldn’t argue with you.
Don’t ask where 40 million blogs came from – and counting [ www.technorati.com ] people want to chip in. Don’t you?
Great site…
We don’t always realize how much power the media has. The media, is the the power in the world. I am part of a grass-roots effort to make real change using blogs and it is working. It is growing very quickly, faster than I ever imagined and it is all viral.
We are calling it the Million Person March
www.warriormonks.org