News media is so important for our society. This is how our society is informed of what events are currently, recently or to eventually happen. The problem with news media is that different stations are biased. The worst thing that ever to news stations is the injection of influences, funding and political views. Funding, I believe, is the biggest of all issues because the world revolves around money and every business/organization news a revenue stream to stay in business. Here is a scenario to help better understand my previous statement. Imagine if CNN received an annual investment from Coca-Cola then at some point in that year Coca-Cola is found to be involved in a scandal of some sort. Now CNN is a reliable source of news for millions of people all over the world, CNN must deliver the story but they’ll probably bend the truth in areas and try to minimize the situation to keep their investors happy. Scenarios as such are not uncommon and that is why people often have their reliable news sources.

Probably the two biggest news stations are CNN and Fox News both are enormously influenced by political parties and this past election outlined that. Fox News is viewed as leaning right and because of that the station is loved by Republicans. In a survey done by Business Insider asking responders to choose the most and least bias news stations, Fox News was viewed as the most bias new station for said Democrats but then the least bias for said Republicans. On the other scope, CNN was viewed as the most bias for said Republicans and was at the top tier for least bias with said Democrats. Then you have MSNBC which holds a tier in the middle of the field. Holding middle ground is not something that individuals like, they want a right or wrong answer and if that can’t be achieved then they want you to pick a side. MSNBC doesn’t do either of these so, it comes as no surprise that the network received negative feedback from both political parties. The question that resides is how can news programs that are supposedly spreading the same message have such different views to viewers. The media decides what points of interest to maximize and minimize, sides are chosen with many topics and issues of the world, and in effect you have individuals that form positions based on what the media highlights.

I am not much into politics so when it comes to watching the news I don’t have much a personal bias nor do I pay attention much to what they initially speak on. I always let the news play out before deciding what is right or wrong and if the news is that important to me then I will do my own research to find my answers before believing anyone else. The media has proven to just be a race for facts and because of that you’ll often receive misleading or even completely false information. In a world that rely so heavily on media coverage, who do we as the people turn for the truth?

Questions for response:

What news station do you watch on a regular?

Have you ever heard completely false information from the news?

If you take a look at current media, whether it be TV shows, news, popular music, etc. I think we can all agree, there’s definitely not enough representation. Not only are there just not enough people of color, but it’s also just not proportional to the diversity of our general population. Sure there’s some representation here and there, but I’ve seen lots of people say it’s like you opened up a bag full of M&M’s and instead of seeing a nice mix of those blues, reds, browns, etc. You see an entire bag of blues, and a single yellow. And now you’re supposed to feel appreciative of that. It feels like the bare minimum right?

Not only is it downright discouraging to see such a lack of representation on the daily, but it’s also damaging in so many ways. As pointed out in chapter 14, Ethical Issues in Mass Media, a lot of news rooms tend to be mostly white both on and off screen. With this lack of diversity, a lot of current issues that involve BIPOC are either grossly under reported, or misrepresented. When a place like the news is mostly populated by those with privilege, in this case white privilege, it’s not surprising that majority of the topics reported are from a privileged point of view and analysis. Privilege and lack there of shapes people’s experiences as they go through life, and so their way of perceiving and understanding situations is going to be different depending on their life too. White people are going to be more concerned about what directly affects them, and they’re going to share their analysis of it, based on their experience. A person of color might have concerns about issues other than those mostly being reported, and on those that are, they might have an entirely different viewpoint on the situation. That’s why diversity in media is so important. With more diversity, a wider collection of stories, important to a wider audience, could be reported and there would be multiple valuable takes on what’s being presented. I feel like this would also help provide more relevant news for everyone, and in turn, multiple groups of people can use some of the same sources of information. It’s great to have a couple of sources you go to, but a lot of those considered to be the most trustworthy are mainly white, and thus are bound to run into the issues mentioned above. It’s obvious people are going to want to go somewhere they’re better represented and catered to, but it also leads to a sort of dissonance between the sources different people consider to be the most trustworthy.

There’s a long way to go until I feel the news can truly cater to everyone who needs it sadly. But I hope that’s something our generation and the ones after us can change for the better. Other than the lack of representation both on screen and off, I would like to ask if you feel there are other things that need to change in order to create better news?

When it comes to the Media, there’s no doubt that there’s a percentage of control over what we see and how that may affect us, but as years go on it’s shown that ethics are slowly becoming less and less of a priority in said media. With more and more news outlets showing us simply what they believe will get them clicks and what would save face, where does that leave ethics? Should the government crack down on such antics? That’s what we learned during class this week.

When reading the chapter for this week, looking specifically at 14.3 when talking about News and the Media, we see the chapter goes on to speak about the push for distribution rather than getting the information first. “Newsrooms are asking their staffs to focus on producing first accounts more quickly to feed multiple platforms. This often means that more resources go into distributing information than gathering it”

This goes onto be another point within the chapter, explaining that there is much more intrusive behavior within Newsrooms, publications, and editorial rooms. With outlets being so focused within the realm of being the first to report a story, there’s little to no room for those being reported on. Not only this but this also leads into the topic of human error. With the speeds of which reporters and editors are pushing News stories to get the first interactions of their, and other, viewers there’s no telling what information they could get incorrect in that window of time.

For example. One of the more recent celebrity tragedies, that being the passing of Kobe Bryant and his daughter in a helicopter crash, was miss-informed on ABC News. Not only affecting the intake of information of the viewer, but ultimately impacting the lives of the Bryant family.

Letting such a large issue of a family, no matter how famous, get so skewed simply because a news outlet wanted to be the first to report on it is simply irresponsible and negligent to the victims involved. Another example of this being of the same story but of another news station. Becoming somewhat of a domino effect all because of “time restraints”.

Can you imagine just how the mother of Kobe’s daughter’s must have felt if her daughters weren’t immediately by her side to disprove that news story? What of all the local news stations covering the same story? Should they be held responsible for their actions on this family even IF they’re news stations? Personally, i believe so.

The new, it’s something that almost every kid hates when it’s taking up the tv at night, and It’s something you don’t talk during when Dads Trying to listen. the news used to be the people eyes and ears for any breaking news happening around the world, the news would tell you anything from what world leaders had at lunch during a meeting to where the newest war is today. Now a days the news seems more like a reality tv show rather than an informative channel. But is it that news stations are getting more untrustworthy or the people are getting harder to keep watching something?

                      As we have talked about in previous blogs that entertainment has changed a lot over the years, and the people watching it have changed as well. The way people consume this entertainment has changed the most over the years, from books and newspapers to radios to tv. With the way they send the media out has changed so has the ability to go more and more into depth in the topic so people get better understanding of what people feel and say. This also makes it easier to see how people truly feel inside by being able to see peoples face as they talk unlike the radio and newspapers. This could mean that the reason behind news stations getting more political is that they aren’t doing anything more besides their facial expression and the tone of their voice when they talk about someone. For example, if news caster 1 says “Trump signed another executive order then morning” and says it in a monotone voice without a smell. Than news caster 2 on another channel says “The President signed an executive order this morning” with a upbeat tone and a smell on there face. I think it’s pretty safe to say most people can pick up on what way the news casters lean politicly. And this is some of what I think is happing today and why there are news networks that lean one way or the other is because it’s sometimes hard to hide how you really feel when talking on camera but it is easier to hide your views when writing in a newspaper not saying it’s not possible but its definably harder.

                      This week’s viewing was very interesting and was very cool to watch what it’s like inside a newsroom other than the movie the Anchorman. The first episode of the news room was very fast paced which I liked lot, this show really show chased the work that goes in to a news story from the beginning to end. It also talked about how news is not just news it is paid for by sponsors and the news station has to a line its self with the sponsors values it’s not just a news station that produces news. I also think the way they determine what news stores ae worth covering was very out dated seeming and makes me wonder what stores they pass up on to keep a narrative or to save a political party they are affiliated with. I think news should be free flowing and we shouldn’t just hear about the things that will make the most money or the most sure thing, it should be about the American people and what they need to hear and nothing else.

My question to the readers is what do you think does it make you nervous that the news is getting to be more about their affiliations and not about bring you the stores that matter to the people?                                

This weeks reading and viewings revolve around the moral and ethical responsibilities that go into media reporting. Chapter 14, “Ethics of Mass Media” begins by discussing the freedoms of the press and any concerns that might arise when reporting controversial stories in regards to the publics right to privacy. In my opinion there should never be any government affiliation with the media in terms of suppression or choosing what is to be aired. There should never be a story that the media is lawfully prevented from airing as long as it is entirely truthful. However, the media should also be held accountable for the types of stories they air and how. In the current political climate the media is one of the major reasons for all of our current division. On all sides there are concerns of intentional disinformation, or rather the intentional omission of key facts to help push an agenda. Is it ethical to even take a side in the news? Wouldn’t you rather receive all of the facts and make your own conclusions?

In the pilot episode for The Newsroom Will McAvoy is seemingly pressured into speaking from the heart as he realizes how sick and tired he is of the current state of the media. He utters a very controversial speech followed by words of hope and encouragement that doesn’t seem to take well for anyone. It seems that Will has a pretty bad relationship with his staff and is unpleasant to work for. When his current EP leaves him with most of his staff it seems like he has nothing. As Will prepares and is trying to figure out how to proceed for the future, his old EP, Mackenzie, was hired.

One of the most important parts of this episode follows right after Mackenzie returns is when the news alert pops up for the explosion in the Gulf of Mexico, right off the coast of Louisiana. At first glance his old EP wants to run what seems to be a pretty generic story of this explosion despite being informed of something bigger unfolding in real time. They end up going against what the old EP advised and we were shown the thrills and real time research and journalism as they uncovered a different story than what every other station reported on. They took the time and did their own due diligence rather than take the easy and convenient side of the story. It was very interesting and really opened my mind further as to how complicated and fast paced this industry can be. Overall it was a pretty great episode and I’m definitely going to be watching more.

Right and wrong.  Truth versus lies. It seems like an easy choice, but it is harder to apply than one may think.  Especially important is the presence of ethics in media, and because it is the media informing the whole world about issues, the information they give needs to be accurate.

Understanding Media and Culture outlines several responsibilities the media should fulfill, including having a social responsibility to citizens, giving news that both serves and informs citizens, is fair to all sides, presents news in a way that is not simplistic but complex, gives different perspectives, and acts as a “watchdog” over the government and corporations (587-588).  If a news organization is not fulfilling these criteria, one should question whether it should be listened to anymore. 

There are several reasons why a news outlet may not meet all of these criteria.  The first and probably biggest hurdle the news media face to reporting news ethically is making a profit and staying afloat financially (Understanding Media and Culture 585).  News outlets must make the choice about profit and telling people what they want to hear versus facts and possible controversy.  At times however, news outlets will choose to please their sponsors and not let out certain stories that would harm their sponsors.  They choose revenue over truth, which is not actually illegal.  Through a documentary clip covering an issue on certain reporters being fired for not changing their article on certain chemicals found in milk in the U.S. that would financially harm the company, Monsanto, and therefore, the news station being sponsored by Monsanto, that, “falsifying news is not against the law.” 

               Another way that ethics are thrown to the wayside is that news outlets get the most profit from a story if they are first.  “With the immediacy of Internet news coverage, mainstream media outlets face increasing pressure to release major news while it is still fresh. That pressure is compounded by celebrity gossip sites like TMZ that may resort to unorthodox methods to gather information; the shelf life of breaking news is growing increasingly shorter” (Understanding Media and Culture 572).  With the pressure of being first however, there is a chance that ethics will lose in the rush.  

               Summing up the real issue of ethics that the media faces in an engaging way is the TV show, The Newsroom.  In the pilot episode, “We Just Decided To,” the rough character/reporter, Will, has stopped saying anything that could be biased towards any side.  When he finally does say something controversial, almost his whole staff leaves.  The character, Mackenzie is hired to the TV station, and though viewers can see that she and Will have a complicated past, she pushes Will to do better in an impassioned speech.  She basically says that it would be better to do a good news show with real facts for only 100 people than to do a crummy one that offends no one for a million.  She calls Will out of the pattern of people-pleasing he has fallen into, and by the end of the episode, the entire station has worked together to do their best to accurately cover a story on an oil spill, even though what they said about it did not match with what the other stations were saying.  Mack gives what the ideal for the media should be, which is that it should be, “worthy of a great republic.”

               What can we do to support ethics in the media?  Why is it so hard to make ethical decisions?  What consequences could it cost the country if the media continues in an unethical pattern?

The United States Constitution guarantees our first amendment right which prohibits any government limiting freedom of religion, expression, peaceful assembly, or the right of citizen to petition the government. The United States population has become more varied. In 2010, 27.6 percent of the population recognizes their race as non-white. In the year of 1999, there was 26 newly published TV programs, none of their programs had an African American in a leading role. This started the NAACP which stands for National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. This group support Hispanic Americans that help coordinated protests and boycotts. ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox wanted to create more of a diverse programming.

In the year of 2002, racial minorities were often lacking, unimportant, or taken on a stereotyped role in films. Studies showed that subgroups are even more diminished in the productive and decision-making positions. This unavailability of representation among creators, journalists, and administrators often affects the way sub racial stereotypes. Even though this stereotyping is in entertainment media, it is also in news reporting’s. Most journalists, editors, and reporters are predominately white.  In the year of 2000, there was 11.6 percent of broadcasting studio staff in the United States that were ethnic minorities. This issue is not improving ever well, in 2008, newsroom census had results of 13.52 percent. The under representation of these people, the news media are led by privileged that give narratives about people that are unprivileged in films that leads to racial stereotypes.

Journalists has a code of ethics such as, present news stories that inform and provide the desires of citizens, present issues equally, present stories in a way that focuses on their complexity, present diverse viewpoints, and observe government and corporations. Even though there are codes in place but not everyone follows the ethics for example, The Huffington Post.  A news website that has over 2,000 bloggers, blogging is sometimes slammed by more traditional journalists for the trend, to include biases, untrustworthy information, and unfounded opinions which would violate the journalistic codes.

The pilot of The Newsroom highlighted some very present viewpoints surrounding newscasters and journalism.  Will McAvoy publicly expresses his discontent with the way society and America currently is in his opening speech that he reluctantly makes.  He remembers a time when we weren’t afraid to report the news and when we paid attention when the news came on and that reporters took pride in their reporting.  We believed the news anchor because we didn’t have to worry about “fake news.”

As the episode unfolds it becomes clear that Will has not been a great boss to his employees because most of them are prepared to leave and go work for another news station.  After giving his big speech he goes on vacation and there are changes within the office, including his old flame who has returned and is now taking the role of his Executive Producer.  Will seems to me like a tough person who grew bitter over the years maybe because he still has feelings for Mackenzie.  I think the speech he gave and when he said, “America is not the greatest country” that he was speaking the truth and from the heart.  That maybe things aren’t as great as they used to be and that there was a time when we took pride in what we did as a country (in his case reporting the news).  The entire episode focused on his effect on those around him and we caught a glimpse of a man who used to inspire and a crew who used to believe in him but grew tired of being treated poorly.  I am thinking that when Mackenzie left, that things went downhill.  She seems to balance him out and guide him into being the person that people look up to and a version of himself that he is proud of.  This episode was meant to show us ‘how far we have fallen’ and to helps us to remember that fast and convenient is not always better.   

As stated in our book, Understanding Media, ‘the internet has generally replaced TV and Radio as the source of immediate information.  Live streams, blogs, and Twitter as well as other outlets make sure that news circulates within minutes of occurrence.  With this continuous cycle of news, I wonder how and if we actually follow up on what is being reported to see what unfolds?  There is no one to filter it and interpret if it is actually “news-worthy.”  I do think that we have to be conscious news and media consumers and do our own research, but I also think that there are so many “headlines” that our heads are spinning! 

Newspapers, television, and radio are struggling to compete with free access to immediate coverage.  “Newsrooms are asking their staffs to focus on producing first accounts more quickly in order to feed multiple platforms,”  (Understanding Media) which means more resources are spent distributing it rather than gathering information.  This means that some stories may get reported on excessively; other stories go unnoticed while facts go unchecked.  Journalist Patricia Sullivan states, “Right now almost no online news sites invest in original, in-depth and scrupulously edited news-reporting.”  (Understanding Media) In order to investigate stories, it takes time and research.  How can we be certain we are getting the full story if we expect the full report right away?  I appreciated the way the team in The Newsroom worked together to get their information from several sources and checked to make certain they were credible before reporting. 

Question:  What online apps do you use to get your news?  When was the last time you watched the news on television?

Works Cited:

HBO, The Newsroom:  We Just decided To

Understanding Media and Culture:  An Introduction to Mass Media, Chapter 14 Ethics of Mass Media