"The Media"

So if we can't believe the media, who do we get our information from? Is word-of-mouth gossip to be believed? Every freak who says we're nothing but lied to and brainwashed by chemtrails is more accurate and in tune with reality than the institutions with journalists (who actually do live by a code) and resources and, believe it or not, a responsibility to the people? I've said it before; the media exists for and because of the people, and the people will call bulls**t when they see it. Yes, there is a certain amount of manipulation going on, and that is unfortunate, but it also means that there is something to hide, and when we find it we have power over the corrupt establishment. Journalism has done it in the past, and will do it again. Mainstream media outlets ARE owned by the richest people. These outlets WILL manipulate stories and facts to support their owners' goals. That is a failure of the OWNER, not of JOURNALISM. Putting blanket statements over things like this doesn't do anybody any good. "The media" is not an entity. It is not a thing with intentions and agendas. It is the conglomerate of published sources for news and information. It, in itself, is not guilty of any one crime. It is a label for that which you cannot dismiss with a single label.

People crying "fake news" need to take into account all of the reporting from an outlet, not just the parts they don't agree with, and evaluate the overall accuracy. You can't dismiss an entire publication as invalid simply because its views are not yours. On the contrary, it's a chance to enlighten yourself with what the rest of the world already recognizes. And anything written as an "Opinion" piece can say whatever it wants. The president calls the Washington Post "fake news," then he holds it up to the public when the headline is "Acquitted".

I think part of my lack of shock and outrage at the bias of mainstream media is due to the fact that I was never under the illusion that they exist to tell us the truth. Media, including news outlets, are businesses. I've always known that. They make their money through advertising. To get advertisers, they need viewership/listeners/readers: an audience. To get an audience they have to appeal to that audience. That includes giving them stories they are interested in, and not offending them with insulting or distressing content. I believe the news tries to give the people what they want. Noam Chomsky says that the media, above all, is interested in profits. He suggests that they value profits over informing the people. That's not a hard pill to swallow when you've understood that all along. In my opinion, the news (and particularly mainstream news) should not be your only source for knowing what's going on in the world. Frankly, things like social media have proven invaluable in giving people an alternative to MSM. Yes, you get a lot of misinformation, but as with the corporate media, you take what they give you and you form your own picture. Common sense and evaluation can narrow down much of what you hear to what you can believe. I personally have worked on a college newspaper. I understand how stories are selected and written and edited, and it's not that different from what I see in professional media outlets. Sensationalism is nothing new; it gets people to pick up your paper. Think "clickbait." It doesn't have to be true, it very often uses misleading images or headlines, and the goal is to attract traffic so they can sell advertising based on those numbers. It doesn't matter if the people are being informed. It doesn't matter if people are disappointed. It only matters that they can show that you looked at it.

In general, thanks to the way my dad acted when I was growing up, I don't trust salesmen. I don't trust someone whose job is clearly to try and get me to do something that benefits him. It's manipulation. Sure, there are salesmen with integrity who will tell you if they don't think their product, whatever it may be, is suited to you. I'm not saying I particularly dislike salesmen. I'm saying I go into my dealings with them knowing what it is they're after, and not fooling myself into thinking that my best interest is their primary goal. Even in the cases where it may be. But hopefully I can see that in the way they conduct themselves. I go into my interactions with them with a certain skepticism. I look at the news the same way.

Do you blindly believe everything anyone tells you? Or do you take it all as information for you to process and evaluate? People in general are often accused of being mindless followers because of the sources they cite to back up their arguments. It can appear that they are arguing to support the source, rather than the other way around.

When I watch the news on TV, I understand that there will be a certain amount of "puff pieces" that are meant to make people feel good, to make them happy and give them a break from the bad news. There are people who will argue that these pieces are being used to hide the truth about all the terrible things that are happening in the world. I believe they are used to help keep their viewership with some pleasantness they don't have to think about. There is enough rotten stuff happening in the world to keep a 24-hour news channel going around the clock with all the bad news. But that gets tiring. Very few people really want that. Then the outlets are accused of glossing over the important things with meaningless things. There's also the fact that not everything can be covered by any one source, simply because there is so much going on.

Coming back to social media, this gives us a chance to broadcast ideas to potentially large groups without having to go through editorial bureaucracy or corporate filters. That is a good thing. As I said, it can also be very misleading. The good thing that I've said before about mainstream media is that, when blatant untruths are published, much of the time the public or other news sources will refute them. There is no shortage of people who like to "call bullshit" if something clearly inaccurate is published/broadcast/posted, etc. In general I believe all news media will run the story that will get the most people interested, with a consideration for the truth in the interest of their reputation.

In short, the story selection and coverage in the news is as much a consequence of its audience as it is the "puppetmasters" pulling the strings. Yes, they may give a skewed report of what's happening. Yes, they may neglect stories that some people feel are important. But, taken all together, the picture that is painted by the various mainstream news outlets, the independent media, and social media should give you the information you need to discern what is important to you, and what is happening with regard to those subjects. Don't get all your eggs from one basket.