by Eric Linderman
U-Wire
Of all the media outlets available to us, none generates more distrust and hostility than the television. Despite that fact, it's still where most normal people get their news.
That's unfortunate because, as many media analysts have already noted, "TV journalism" is somewhat of an oxymoron. One reason for that, of course, is increasing conglomerate control, which we'll get to later. Another reason is the journalists themselves.
It's not a stretch at all to say that most of today's TV journalists are more interested in their own celebrity than what they're reporting on. It seems they've fallen in love with their own role in revealing big scandals.
Ever since Watergate, the journalist's celebrity has been enhanced. A trend of over-aggressive (bordering on tabloid) reporting has emerged where reporters use intimidation and hidden cameras to gallantly expose corruption and wrong-doing. For an example, look no further than Detroit's "Fox 2 Hall of Shame."
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
Here, the stories are so ludicrously oversold you'd think something on the scale of Watergate happens every day. One of the more recent episodes exposed, if I'm not mistaken, were some Ford employers smoking a little pot on the job (might've been on their lunch break). Before moving in with the camera, the reporter said: "Little did they know, I was about to rock their world."
In each installment of the series, our heroic "problem solvers" run up to the supposed bad guy(s) armed with a camera, then brusquely shove a microphone in their face to respond to their accusations. Naturally, the interviewed comes off somewhat incoherent, nervous and seems reluctant to talk. "Ah ha," the viewer is supposed to think, "that can only mean one thing. They're guilty."
Well, no. It doesn't prove a thing. If a case is complicated, it can be difficult for people accused to disprove claims. The interviews are entirely self-serving theater, designed to make the journalist appear gritty and aggressive. And they certainly are that. I'm not so sure, however, that they're aggressively trying to get at the truth - unless, of course, the truth is somehow sexy and compelling.
Also consider that, with increasing conglomerate control creeping in, the "Hall of Shame" could be nothing more than a tool used to serve corporate interests. Many news organizations are being bought by companies whose main business has nothing to do with journalism. It's conceivable that these companies, now hooked up with Fox News, could use the "Hall of Shame" to help smear their competition.
Or maybe I've seen too many Oliver Stone movies.
Moving on, it's clear that Wall Street, to a certain degree, determines the content of network and cable news programs. Virtually every newscast has a special segment devoted to the stock market implying that most everyone is cashing in on high stock prices.
The truth, according to a recent analysis of the Federal Reserve Board done by New York University, is that 79 percent of all stocks, mutual funds and retirement accounts are owned by the wealthiest 10 percent of the population. That 10 percent is, of course, the part of the audience a news broadcast wants to keep interested. Needless to say, advertisers pay more money for an audience with deep pockets.
You're not likely to find stories discussing the true nature of the economy on your local news station. Reports on our thriving economy will almost certainly be sanitized to prevent you from seeing the dark side of that success. The emphasis of the story will be on the part favorable to advertisers and investors. Issues concerning the lower class, lower-middle class and elderly will be downplayed. Reporters won't be running out to cover issues like low wages, benefits and affordable housing for the poor.
And if they do, the story will be squished in the middle somewhere between the more important ones about shootings and celebrities.
