[log_base_login]

Without sounding pedantic, I think it's fair to say that the mass media put out a LOT of material into the public domain merely to acquire the largest market share of attention.

It is very rare that I read a story in a newspaper or hear one on television that isn't some form of salacious gossip or eye catching spectacle.

Though I haven't read most of it, Chris Hedges' book: Empire of Illusion, speaks to this with much greater acuity than I can.

I wish we could all just take a breath of fresh air (whoops, there is an allusion to another, though admittedly fairly neutral, piece of media) and remember that we are often much better off without the media dictating what we think should be important. I fear that the fractionism that George Washington cautioned us against in his farewell address is driving most of what we consume from the mass media.

I hesitate even to post this for fear of sounding too alarmist, and for the possible repercussions on myself from the powers that be in their never ending fight to be 'right', but I do think that this is a subject that is important enough to stand up and say "enough is enough". I know I sound paranoid, but as we become ever more connected, it is not as far fetched as it might seem that such things transpire. It is imperative that the power remain in the purview of the public and not those with access to what information money can buy, or cookies can acquire.

[threeseed]

> I read a story in a newspaper or hear one on television that isn't some form of salacious gossip or eye catching spectacle.

I am not American and can't comment on all of the stations but I know PBS has neither of those. Likewise similar public broadcasters do tend to be more serious and moderate in their reporting: BBC (UK), Deutsche Welle (Germany), ABC/SBS (Australia) etc

Unfortunately in a competitive media landscape you need viewers. And humans are just wired to respond to gossip and spectacles.

[ta909123]

> And humans are just wired to respond to gossip and spectacles.

A lot of the more worrying things happen as a result of our evolutionary background I think. We evolved to trust one another ("Was there really a lion over there, Bob?"), and that trust can easily be manipulated if you leave your ethics/morals at the door.

I think there should be laws/regulations against anything that manipulates people based on our evolutionary "upbringing".

[log_base_login]

Thanks for making my point for me.

Every one of your statements is in some way a defense of the current mass media structure. Even your counterexamples of public news sources maintain a sufficiently small enough market share as would be counted as noise in a t-test.

[Retra]

> I fear that the fractionism that George Washington cautioned us against in his farewell address is driving most of what we consume from the mass media.

If you have a significant part of people's attention, then people will give you campaign funds when running for office. So what do you do as a media company? Say everything you can to get people to talk about politics. You don't even need to sell advertising anymore once you can collect campaign contributions directly by selling airtime. It doesn't matter who runs for office, all that matters is that everybody hates them enough to run counter-campaigns, and that nobody wins who has to the power to restrict campaign spending.

All of this is why we had campaign spending limits in the first place.

[coliveira]

That's why the two party system used in the US, while in the surface looks democratic, engenders quite the opposite result. The nature of US politics is that everything a party will support (like global warming) will be bashed or denied by the other. Republican call this, quite accurately, wedge issues. Very soon, the only way to do anything is to get more and more money to be able to win enough support to maintain power (for a limited amount of time). It is clear that such a political system will benefit the owners of capital and restrict the voices of everyone else. We are just looking at the disfunction of a two-party system unfolding before our own eyes.

[Jedd]

Let me allay your concerns - 2pp as exercised by the USA doesn't look like democracy to anyone else. Even 'common' party politics, as seen in most other western societies, are mislabelled as democracies.

[hkon]

Thank you for your service :)

Paranoid? Just look at the last few years. Insane.