4/10/2010
How objective are the media
Astroturfing has been pointed out for booting recently as a deviant way of promoting a position through false or manipulated inputs through the internet. This in turn gives a skewed impression of the real issue at stake, the supports behind it and even the truth. Astroturfing has been singled out as a methodology used to influence and pressure the govt to act in a certain way. In other words, astroturfing is simply a manipulative way of conveying a message by a group of people for their own interests.
Is this something new? All media, new media or old media, are they so innocent, so objective, so truthful, that they never intentionally push a position by bending backwards, with twisted logic, selective logic and even manipulating statistics to support a position? I am saying this in general, not directing at anyone.
How many old and new media are guilty of the things astroturfing are now infamous for? None? Did I hear none?
I think everyone knows the truth and how media, old and new, manipulate views, opinions and try to influence the way people see or look at an issue. The old and new media are just as good as astroturfing. Nothing more nothing less.
Then there are worst forms of influencing the minds of people by state media and propaganda. Much more deadly and effective than what astroturfing is deemed to have done. The people of America, the free world, and the people of dictatorship and the authoritarian states, are all victims and targets of official media to think in the way the state wants them to think.
So, what is new?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
What's new is that in astroturfing, the perpetrators hide behind anonymity or fake IDs and broadcast opinions or news repetitiously in a disguised manner giving the impression of a groundswell of opinion for or against an issue.
In mainstream media, the perps are made known and what they say carries as much weight as their reputation for fair reporting and objectivity.
Agreed that both are equally culpable in distorting the truth.
Read everything with a pinch of salt. Even the Bible is fallible same with the scriptures of every known religion on this Planet of Cons.
Astroturfing can also be an excuse for the supposedly astroturfed to discredit the purported astroturfer.
What is objectivity? Or what is truth?
Not necessarily true that the one holding the biggest gun or power is telling the truth, even though he forces you to believe so.
Then it becomes the distorted truth, but because he holds the gun, it becomes the official truth.
Any views contrary to that is therefore designated as untruth and lies.
So, what is objectivity and who is telling the truth.
Anyone who receives free publications, be they national newspapers, your services providers, commercial brochures and even official(governmental) publications, they are all some forms of brainwashings and sometimes pure bluffs.
The question of "objectivity" is related to whether or not you can test the facts for their veracity -- that is assuming it is "facts" and not "opinion" that is been tested.
The difference between objectivity and subjectivity is this:
1. Objectivity -- you are either correct or incorrect -- constrained narrowly to a defined context
2. Subjectivity -- you can never be incorrect -- context itself can change
e.g. Objectivity 1+1 = 5 - incorrect. The earth revolves arounnd the sun == correct. "That tree is green". Objectivity claims are testable
Subjectivity -- durians stink -- depends on the individual, so to the individual who thinks durians stink, he is correct,
"That green tree looks beautiful" -- beauty is in the eye of the beholder: a saying which poetically describes what subjectivity is.
Claims based on subjectivity are difficult to test conclusively.
Media objective? Be critical. Like everything else, the objectivity and subjectivity are mixed up together.
Annexe:
To extend the idea of objectivity -- from a genomics perspective (hard core objective science) there is no such thing as RACE.
This is the scientifically proven and verifiable OBJECTIVE position.
However, as we see -- here in this blog too -- the vast majority of people actually do believe that there is "something" called "race".
AAA 1998 Statement on race
So is it ok to be racist?
Since we are dealing with a bullshit myth -- ABSOLUTELY :)
Moral of the story is, to trust no one and find out the facts, test them and decide for yourself.
Subjective opinions/claims can be tested to see how close they are to being objective/truth.
What shall we call the bullshit generated in the media? Mediaturing/ Astromedia?
Actually, 80% bullshitting in the media. Advertisements included. If you live near to building projects, you will notice that the maps they drew to show how close they are to MRTs, good schools, markets etc, all a load of shit on their distorted maps.
Don't say like that lah. Our media is highly regarded. All info checked, double checked, and verified and authoritative. It is the internet media that is questionable, no substance, no quality, full of astroturfing.
Local Official Medias are authoritative because they quoted and quote the Authorities most, if not all the time. Few ever have independent, alternative and better views and ideas
patriot
Our media highly regarded? Somebody tell me what is our recent global ranking in press freedom? Is it No. 1 already?
Now all those foreign rating agencies are biased and they did not know what they are talking about. Our journalists and reporters are THE best, objective, thorough, check and double their facts, and report the news as they are. Hard to beat.
More OBJECTIVITY about the myth behind our species "wrong belief" (in the context of science) that there is something called "race" and that it actually exists.:
http://www.guyharrison.info/
Quote (from Mr Harrison's website):
“Guy Harrison’s well-written and passionate plea for eliminating the idea and ideology of race should be widely read. He has shown that the idea of race not only is contradicted by science but is a social anachronism that should not be tolerated by society in the 21st century.”
– Audrey Smedley, Professor Emerita Anthropology, Virginia Commonwealth University
“Guy P. Harrison’s comprehensive and engaging book should be required reading for anyone who has thought about the benighted issue of ‘race.’ It will clear the cobwebs from your head.”
– Steve Olson, author of “Mapping Human History: Discovering the Past Through Our Genes”
If any of you are smart, lose your "racial" ideas based on labelling and stereotyping ASAP!
Post a Comment