|
|
|
|
|
by golergka
3314 days ago
|
|
Then you change the media from capitalist goals to propaganda. While everyone agrees that media that cares for views and nothing else can be nasty, it's the inly 'objective' measure of what media should show that we can get. When media editors start using their influence for (in this case, very noble) political goals, we find ourselves at their mercy. There's a constant theme in modern democracy that when a certain institution tries just to be a projection of it's customers wishes, it can reveal that these wishes aren't that good. Like Airbnb hosts being racists - is it the problem with individual hosts, or should Airbnb be responsible? Same with media and views: if people react better to sensationalizm and terrorist manifestos, should the media filter their disguisting desires, like a big caring brother, that knows what's best for us? Or should it do whatever we want, showing us all the gore and uglyness? I don't have the answers, and most importantly, I don't think I have a logical framework for these problems. Do you? |
|