Is the current news (print, TV and radio) of sufficiently high quality to warrant it's continued consumption? Is the news unbiased?
Really this question boils down to: "is the news fit for purpose?"
And this begs the question of what that purpose is for us, and we as a people strive towards different ends.
Some people consume news for its entertainment value, even if we discount celebrity, it becomes quite clear that for these people politics is a show. After all everybody enjoys holding an opinion and seeking to justify it. For such people the news as it stands is fit for purpose.
But there are other people for whom this news is just not enough.
I for one use Facebook as my alternative and daily stream of news. I do this by having politically active friends. I also at times read the guardian but that is for more joined up intelligence, which is not the same as knowledge, rather than the daily intelligence of fact.
I stay away from broadcast news. And I am not an isolated case, increasingly young people also look upon news with disdain.
Why do I do that?
Because I suppose I just don't trust it.
If I look back on my time line I can prove to myself the lies and hypocrisy of today's news from Yassar Arafat's sudden death by poisoning which came to light and then was denied, to the Gaza lies, all tell a woeful story that our news is in the hands of the powerful.
Whilst once it might have been taught that news is one of the great bastions of democracy, the holding in check of the powerful.
That talk has turned to that of curbing the power of the press, but this belies that fact that the only press left is of the entertainment kind. The press of critical examination of the powers that be has moved on to the retirement fields. Not least because our politicians have become clowns.
Seriously funny clowns if it weren't for the implications of their actions.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
No comments:
Post a Comment