Essay on should we trust the media

Many people do not trust what they read or hear in the media. For example, in a survey conducted in 2012 in the United States by Gallup, people were asked, ” to what extent they believe” exactly in unbiased and comprehensive coverage of the facts in the news appearing in the media, on television and radio. Every 6 out of 10 people responded, ” Not very confident” or ” not sure.” Is this distrust justified?
Many journalists and the companies, in which they work, have committed themselves to providing accurate, informative evidence. Yet there is cause for concern. Consider the following aspects:
Media mogul. Mainstream media are owned by a small number of highly influential corporations. Media largely determine which events, how wide and how to cover. Since the goal of most corporations is profit, media solutions may be dictated by commercial interests. What is not beneficial to owners of media corporations may be held back (Moy and Scheufele 745).
Politics. Much of what we learn in the news is related to politics of the government and public officials. The authorities want to convince people to support the political course taken by them, as well as their representatives. And since the media get their information from government sources, they often cooperate with them.
Advertising. In many countries, in order to remain competitive, the media should be repaid, most of which comes from advertising. In the US, magazines receive from advertising up to 50-60 percent of the profits, newspapers – 80 percent, and commercial television and radio – 100 percent. It is no wonder that advertisers are not willing to sponsor programs that portray in a bad light their products or management style. If they are not satisfied with the work of a news agency, they can place their ads elsewhere. This sometimes causes the editor to elide topics that cast a shadow on sponsors.
Dishonesty. Not all journalists differ by honesty. Sometimes the information is simply fabricated. For example, several years ago, a Japanese journalist decided to make a report on how divers treat corals badly in Okinawa. Not finding any evidence of acts of vandalism, he deliberately spoiled some coral and then photographed it. Often, in order to mislead people, there are used fake pictures. Today, photo-editing technology stepped forward so that some manipulation of the photographs is almost impossible to detect.
Treatment. Even if some facts are undeniable, much depends on how they are presented, what is told and what is ignored (Kiousis 382). For example, the football team lost the match, losing two points to the opposing team. This is a fact. But then, why it happened, journalists can interpret in different ways.
Silencing. Highlighting the event, reporters for emphasis may omit details that entail difficulties or raise unresolved issues. As a result, something is exaggerated, but something held back. And as journalist and broadcaster sometimes need to tell a lot just in a couple of minutes, the important details may be not mentioned.
Competition. In recent decades, the number of TV channels has increased, so people spend less and less time watching any single channel. Wanting to capture the attention of viewers, news agencies have to offer something sensational or entertaining. News turned into a stream of successive images, chosen so that to shock the audience or tickle, and reports have become even shorter to keep the attention of non-permanent viewers.
Errors. Journalists are people and can also be wrong. Typo, comma, which has been put in the wrong place, or grammatical error can distort the meaning of the sentence. Not always, the facts are carefully checked. With numbers also come oversight when, for example, a journalist in a hurry preparing release prints 100, 000instead of 10, 000.
Wrong views. Accurate presentation of information is not as easy as it seems. What today is the fact tomorrow may be rebutted. For example, earlier it was believed that the Earth was the center of our solar system. Now, no one doubts that the Earth revolves around the sun.
Thus, there is balance necessary. Of course, it is unreasonable to believe all of what we learn in the news, but it does not mean that absolutely nothing can be trusted (Kohring and Matthes 232). It is important to find a middle ground: to be impartial, while preserving the share of healthy skepticism. Following are some tips that will help us to evaluate what we hear and read.
Reputation of media. Whether the information comes from a trusted, reputable person or organization? What distinguishes the program or publication: the seriousness or the pursuit of sensation? Who funds the news source?
Sources. Are the questions carefully investigated? Is a report based on a single source? What sources are taken: reliable, honest and objective? Are they different by impartiality or the same one-sided illuminating the facts?
The Goal. Ask yourself, ” What is the purpose of this news: provide information or entertain the audience? Create ads or encourage the audience to take someone’s side? “
Tone. If the tone of news is angry, bile or too critical, then most likely it has not sensible arguments, and lunge at someone’s address (DeRosa et al. 20).
Sequence. Is the information presented in other papers or reports? If the facts contradict one another, beware!
Timeliness. Is there enough new information to believe? What was true 20 years ago, today may be outdated. If events continue to evolve, whether this information is complete now?
So, can we trust the media? Good advice gave King Solomon: ” The inexperienced puts faith in every word, but the shrewd one considers his steps”. On November 26, there is celebrated the World Day of information, which is held annually since 1994 by the initiative of the International Informatization Academy, which has general consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations, and the World Informational Parliament. On this day in 1992, the first international forum of information was held (Nah and Chung 715). Huge opportunities opened to humankind by the information age, fraught with hidden threats to spiritual and physical security.
Modern information battles significantly changed personality. If we talk about the private, personal approach to search and analysis of information, we should always be aware of the purpose of the process. When browsing the news flow, we need to clearly understanding the situation and the realities in which we live, be ready to respond to the challenges that we face today. In order not to get depressed by all that is given to us by modern media, we need to use a critical approach. The notion of ” objectivity” of information in the modern world has become quite relative. Therefore, we must pay attention not so much to the news reports as to trends they create. I think that is the most important thing to consider when dealing with information: see the effects that it has created.
In order not to be deceived, we cannot fully trust all that we hear, see and read today. In the world of the media, there is always a need to pay attention to the authority of the publication, its history and basic principles which it adheres. But there is no guarantee to find 100% credible sources. It should be understood that the editorial policy of any publication depends on so many factors that affect the operation of the publication: financial, administrative, legal, etc.
Works Cited
DeRosa, Darleen M., et al. ” Trust and leadership in virtual teamwork: A media naturalness perspective.” Human Resource Management 43. 2‐3 (2004): 219-232.
Kiousis, Spiro. ” Public trust or mistrust? Perceptions of media credibility in the information age.” Mass Communication & Society 4. 4 (2001): 381-403.
Kohring, Matthias, and Jörg Matthes. ” Trust in news media development and validation of a multidimensional scale.” Communication Research 34. 2 (2007): 231-252.
Moy, Patricia, and Dietram A. Scheufele. ” Media effects on political and social trust.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 77. 4 (2000): 744-759.
Nah, Seungahn, and Deborah S. Chung. ” When citizens meet both professional and citizen journalists: Social trust, media credibility, and perceived journalistic roles among online community news readers.” Journalism 13. 6 (2012): 714-730.