A wee while ago, Morguetastic commented on the state of newspaper journalism today. Rather than being the voice of the general public opinion reaching out to the towering pinnacles of government and big business, newspapers and the like are more and more becoming mouthpieces for the government and big business in the guise of still being all about the little man or woman on the street. Quality investigative journalism and comment is being replaced by vox populi, where the word of the “ordinary citizen” on the issues of the day is sought rather than experts on the topics yet to be brought to public attention; or else the extremists and their opinions are either canonised or demonised, while moderate, more considered discussion of the issues is left off the agenda.
Right off, I run into a problem. I am being elitist. How can I not be when I am already asserting that the word of the individual on the street or the impassioned is less “worthy” than the opinion of experts? Let me explain.
The world is gearing down towards the ordinary Jane. The internet has given the word of the smallest person extraordinary power. Even I, not the most well-versed of people in matters of import (not by a long shot), have taken the opportunity occasionally to offer my judgements via the world wide web on matters of minimal import to humanity as a whole. My voice is heard by those who might like to listen. I am even getting “pinged” by people placing advertisements for medication on this site (honestly). I matter.
But I don’t. I have no delusions of grandeur here. My opinion is my opinion, but it is just that. There are others out there who are far more learned than I, those willing to do the hard yards in investigating and finding out “stuff”, tracking down people of interest, spending weeks and months chasing leads and making breakthroughs every once in a while. Getting the scoop. All terms from newspaper life years ago. And all heard too rarely these days.
Why bother digging up dirt when interested parties or individuals will do it for you? Why arrange meetings with people of learning from different parts of the country when there are hundreds of people passing by on the street every day? Greenpeace will keep a track of those pesky Japanese whaling ships; the US military is on the ground in Iraq; prisoners can tell us how they were treated. The story these days tends to be not what journalists have ferreted out, but rather what has walked in through the door that morning.
One could argue though that we get what we deserve. The reason the mainstream papers and media is “dumbing down” (another elitist term) is because people are drawn to the extreme and the immediate. I know when I surf the internet, I tend to gravitate towards sites that interest me, or are written from a perspective that I either agree with or find entertaining. In response to people like me (I assume), the “big media” are catering to the common denominator, to what advertisers want their advertisements to appear in, and what the public is currently buzzing about. What is the point of coming up with something new that potentially will not draw public interest, especially when one needs that interest to stay viable?
Do you remember when there used to be documentaries on the telly? When 60 Minutes or 20/20 actually did serious investigations rather than Vaseline-lensed puff pieces on celebrities or this week’s “medical miracle”? Documentaries on real issues these days are fringe – they basically have to make it as a feature film first to grab attention, and only then do the mainstream media pick up on their message. Even there, though, sometimes the investigator outshines the subject (yes, I am referring to Michael Moore here).
It’s a double edge sword to have so much information at your fingertips, and by allowing the motivated individual to have so much power to get their own message out there. The newspapers no longer need to act as intermediaries for the discoveries of the passionate, so they don’t – unless the money is right.
The mainstream media revel in democracy and provide pleasure to the masses, but they are no longer democracy’s guardians, more its messengers. Fox News and its antithesis The Daily Show (both of which I have mentioned before) don’t really seem to investigate (create?) the news, but they report the news in a way that their target audience will enjoy. The facts, known to almost everyone, take a back seat to the style of presentation. The “digging deeper” (without a political or presentational agenda) may not occur at all. To give The Daily Show some credit (I do enjoy it after all), they do ask some “deeper”, analysing questions, but all too rarely does one get an answer other than a cynically raised eyebrow.
Perhaps the age of the newspaper (and mainstream news media?) as we knew it is over. Perhaps the newspaper becoming the Woman’s Day of non-celebrity news: something light, something frothy; something informative but not overly deep; with a cartoon and star signs and ads for the latest products.
Does this all sound elitist? Probably. Definitely, if my opinion is not shared by the majority. But sitting here on my ElectroThrone of Judgement ™, I gaze out across the cyberscape and see a land of divergent opinion: some based on solid fact, others based on their own interpretation of the world; some concerning matters of depth and subsequence, others documenting day to day life. The newspapers are no longer the ”breaker” of stories; more and more, the source for the latest scandal is the internet, and the individuals who contribute to it.
Verdict: I miss my investigative journalism. But perhaps that is because I am looking in the wrong place. 3 stars out of 5 to the internet, for the power and the responsibility. Mainstream media, 1 star out of 5 for abdicating one of its biggest contributions to society – shame.
No comments:
Post a Comment