There is pretty strong data out there that says that there is not much of a 'conglomeration of opinions' seeing the light of day in mainstream American media. The market for 'alternative viewpoints' is just too small to generate the revenues and viewership needed to justify a channel, and mainstream viewpoints assert the same old points between Democrats and Republicans but more importantly, never critique the economic and political systems that benefit both parties' Congressmen equally.
The nature of today's advertiser-sponsored media eliminates the chance for alternative viewpoints to receive exposure. This setup makes us all believe that there are no other viewpoints out there since we never hear anything about them. But that should be called an unspoken lie.
The real growth story in media right now is independent media. News consumers have completely lost trust in commercial media over the past several years, and the independent, new media often gets revenue from these consumers directly rather than relying on advertisers.
The tipping point in all of this were the WMD lies from the Bush White House that put us into the worst war in history, which left many people scratching their heads about media institutions they once trusted. They remembered Walter Cronkite and his peers - not this crowd who work for a very different industry with a handful of corporate owners who control most of the media and entertainment messages we receive in this country, and who all basically get paid by the same car, oil and consumer goods advertisers who can seemingly do no wrong in the news.
What is happening now may turn into the greatest entrepreneurial moment in American media since the Progressive era of the 1880s when newspapers were published by independent publishers in small towns all across the U.S. Thanks to the rise of new media and independent publications, there will be many new outlets in a competitive marketplace for ideas. Hopefully, some of today's journalists who have integrity will wise up and team up in co-operatives or collectives and create business models for their work. The beauty of not needing presses and physical distribution networks is that they won't have to become gargantuan monopolies to become profitable.
Here's an inspiring quote from 1734 by Andrew Bradford, founder of The American Weekly Mercury, Pennsylvania's first newspaper. He defines press freedom as 'a liberty of detecting the wicked and destructive measure of certain politicians, of dragging villainy out of its obscure lurking holes and exposing it in its full deformity to open day ... of attacking wickedness in high places, of disentangling the folds of a wicked and corrupt administration, and pleading freely for a redress of grievances.'
Notice there is no talk here about 'liberals' or 'leftists' or 'socialists' or 'illegals' or 'gays' or 'feminists' or 'foreigners' or 'blacks' or 'Muslims' or 'Jews.' Instead, Bradford rightly focuses on politicians, corrupt administrations and wickedness in high places. This is what we can hope for from new media eventually.
A democracy cannot exist without a vibrant and free press. We need to accept that a free press means freedom from influence bought by businessmen and the politicians who are in bed with them. This dire situation needs to be exposed to young voters so politicians and their corporate cronies won't be able to do to the youth of America what they've done to those of us so close to our retirement age.
No comments:
Post a Comment