Blame the viewers for the decline of American news
Ours is a consumer culture. Nearly everything about the United States functions on the concept that the customer is always right, from the reality shows that allow the viewers to pick the winner to our Democratic-Republican government that allows us to elect the exciting, fresh-faced politician du jour and then replace him a few years later, when we tire of him. We are proud of this culture. The American citizen expects to have his views taken into account by every politician who represents him, every corporation with which he comes into contact and every school and university we attend. We wouldn't have it any other way.
Why, then, are we so confused by the fact that the media, too, is subject to the whims of the American consumer? We complain bitterly about the decline in the quality of the media, whether we think it's too partisan, not partisan enough or too interested in the activities of celebrities and their issues with undergarments. But what we fail to consider is why this has happened. Did big, bad Rupert Murdoch invade us with the intention of dumbing down our news coverage? NO. Rupert Murdoch and the media moguls of his ilk are simply adhering to the same concepts that we expect from any corporation competing for our patronage: They are working to please the consumer.
What's wrong, liberals? Evil Fox News too conservative? O'Reilly and company making you sad? What's wrong, conservatives? Whiny, liberal MSNBC and Keith Olbermann playing your game too well? Newsflash for everyone: We all like hearing our own views coming out of the box. And the ratings suggest we like it a lot more than hearing basic neutral blurbs.
This is not new. Since newspapers first began to spread around the British colonies in the New World, they have colored the news with an opinionated tint. In the years leading up to the American Revolution, Loyalists and Patriots perused different newspapers - newspapers that the readers knew would offer perspectives they would like. No sooner did the Revolution end than the newspapers realigned themselves along Federalist and Anti-Federalist (later Democratic-Republican) lines. Thomas Jefferson, known for penning the Declaration of Independence, serving as our first Secretary of State, our second Vice-President and our third President, had this to say about newspapers: "Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. ... I will add that the man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them; inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors." This from a man who sneaked a prominent editor of a pro-Democratic-Republican newspaper onto the government payroll.
Why, then, are we so confused by the fact that the media, too, is subject to the whims of the American consumer? We complain bitterly about the decline in the quality of the media, whether we think it's too partisan, not partisan enough or too interested in the activities of celebrities and their issues with undergarments. But what we fail to consider is why this has happened. Did big, bad Rupert Murdoch invade us with the intention of dumbing down our news coverage? NO. Rupert Murdoch and the media moguls of his ilk are simply adhering to the same concepts that we expect from any corporation competing for our patronage: They are working to please the consumer.
What's wrong, liberals? Evil Fox News too conservative? O'Reilly and company making you sad? What's wrong, conservatives? Whiny, liberal MSNBC and Keith Olbermann playing your game too well? Newsflash for everyone: We all like hearing our own views coming out of the box. And the ratings suggest we like it a lot more than hearing basic neutral blurbs.
This is not new. Since newspapers first began to spread around the British colonies in the New World, they have colored the news with an opinionated tint. In the years leading up to the American Revolution, Loyalists and Patriots perused different newspapers - newspapers that the readers knew would offer perspectives they would like. No sooner did the Revolution end than the newspapers realigned themselves along Federalist and Anti-Federalist (later Democratic-Republican) lines. Thomas Jefferson, known for penning the Declaration of Independence, serving as our first Secretary of State, our second Vice-President and our third President, had this to say about newspapers: "Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. ... I will add that the man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them; inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors." This from a man who sneaked a prominent editor of a pro-Democratic-Republican newspaper onto the government payroll.
Be the first to comment on this story