OK So I used towork in media (even though i hate the industry!) and i’m looking at the beeb (that’s the BBC for those of you who don’t know) and I find out that they’re focusing on freedom of speech to celebrate 75 years of BBC World Service (what a celebration that will be!!)
I It got me thinking…We all know that newspapers love to sensationalise and sometimes mislead their consumers…how do they get away with it??? Is this the unfortunate cost of press freedom?? What are the arguments FOR press freedom?? In terms of arguments for, a lot of media savvy’s (snotty b*****ds i like to call them) think that press freedom equates to the right of self expression…great!! fantastic!! If we never had that right, I would not be able to air my views like I am now. However…as far as I’m concerned, you cannot apply this theory to that of powerful insitutions like Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp (sorry Rupert, I know you own this site, but you know I’m right ). If you’re going to apply something like that to insitutions, then consider this…as individuals, we are powerless and we can do harm if we are careless about our accuracy.
We don’t allow major companies like Sainsbury’s or British Airways to be inaccurate about their products.
However there are even laws for us against slander, inciting hatred and libel. Now if insitutions like the media were casual about accuracy, it can cause a great load of damage to the reputation of individuals and to that of large insitutions and communities. If the powerful conglomerates of the media today had unconditional freedom of speech, they would easily be able to be inaccuracies, causing great damage to others and therefore undermining democracy…so all that rubbish about press freedom being like freedom of speech is frankly UNREAL…i don’t care how fashionable it is!
Speaking of democracy..again the media savvy’s think that press freedom appeals to the needs of democracy…again…and to be honest ..think about it…democracy would needs a press that can inform it’s citizens ACCURTAELY! And of course if requirements for accuracy were too tightly drawn then frankly think the press would be intimidated. And no one can be sure of getting everything correct even with the zealous “Fact-checking”… Frankly I think that the whole press freedom thing is unjustified! The government have a HUGE influence over the media (which i hope we all know)…and personally, I think that the press is there, to help the government influence the way in which society develops…as the views and morals of the government and the press changes so will the minds of some individuals (i.e those who rely on nothing but the press for their facts!).
However, I would like to think that society is developed enough to be able to have their own views, opinions and morals in life! Why should we have to live life the way society expects us to!?! We are afterall INDIVIDUALS!! Slightly of track there, but hey..I’M RANDOM!! :D
Posts
Dressed To Kill
-
*F i l m S k o o l*
*________________________________*
Upon its release in 1980, Brian De Palma's *Dressed to Kill* was as
acclaimed for its stylish set...
2 hours ago
2 comments:
With that in mind, I thought you'd like this piece of dialogue from "Yes, Prime Minister":
Prime Minister: I know exactly who reads the papers. The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country. The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country. The Times is read by people who actually do run the country. The Daily Mirror is read by the wives of the people who run the country. The Financial Times is read by people who own the country. The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country. The Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.
Sir Humphrey: Prime Minister, what about people who read The Sun.
Bernard: Sun readers don't care who runs the country as long as she's got big tits.
hehehe oh i do like indeed! You REALLY need to introduce me to "Yes Prime Minister" , I feel I'm missing out on something pretty decent lol
Post a Comment