Journalism's Shift

So let me get this straight. You want to take money from the U.S. Federal Government, the biggest, most corrupt bureaucracy in the world, and dole it out to struggling media outlets, often considered the political watchdogs to the federal entity? Please. The whole of this idea is a sloppy, contradictory mess. It's certainly not worth a second glance.
A recent report from Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism is advocating that exact idea. According to the report, local public-affairs journalism outlets are dying out, for a variety of reasons. They want the IRS or Congress to, among other things, create, "... [a] national Fund for Local News ... with money the Federal Communications Commission now collects from or could impose on telecom users, television and radio broadcast licensees, or Internet service providers and administered in open competition through state Local News Fund Councils."

...

I'll give you a moment to let that sink in.

...

Are we good? In the back, are you good? Ok, let's move on.

In essence, the authors of the report want to take money already used by the federal government to essentially bail out failing local news outlets (either that, or let's just raise taxes. Hell or high water, we lose). The authors, and other small-time and non-profit journalists who have jumped on board, point out that the government has produced other entities that operate in the same manner, such as the nation Endowment for the Arts, the Humanities, etc. Still, journalism has always been (and I'm going to shoot myself for advocating this point) a capitalistic, free-market operation. Newspaper are private companies- allowing the government to provide legitimate funding for their operation opens the door to the slippery slope argument of eventual government control of media outlets. This has been, and always should be, the antithesis of the press in American society.

Even proponents of the idea admit that there are serious risks. Joel Kramer at Inside MinnPost says that, “The funding would not be for specific stories, but for broader, longer-range innovations in newsgathering and organizational sustainability. Even so, it’s easy to imagine that that process could become highly politicized.”

So to summarize: We're going to take money from an already shaky, rebuilding economic system, give it to press and media outlets as a free handout, and pretend like nothing illegitimate is going on. Karl Marx would be proud.

Ok, I'm done with my ranting and raving.

The report did contain a lot of informative information. A significant portion was dedicated to an analysis of how journalism has changed and evolved in recent years do to a shifting market, changing public opinions and cultural principles, evolutions in media and technology, and so on. My newspaper advisor, Professor MaryAnn Pearson, is also researching this topic. I recently wrote an article for The Banner about how the changing trends in journalism are affecting both professional and student journalists alike.

"You really do need a combination of skills to work as a journalist," said Pearson.

She also said that, despite the large influx of Web-based writing and the massive spread of information, newspapers do not appear to be dying out like they were a few years ago.

"Journalism is landing on its feet," said Pearson.

So I plug my own work shamelessly. Bite me.

http://www.journalism.columbia.edu/cs/ContentServer/jrn/1212611716674/page/1212611716651/JRNSimplePage2.htm

http://www.journalism.columbia.edu/cs/ContentServer?pagename=JRN/Render/DocURL&binaryid=1212611716626

http://www.minnpost.com/insideminnpost/2009/10/19/12627/a_modest_proposal_for_federal_funding_of_journalism#

Media's Meaningless Message

Anger. Rage. You want to talk about what really ticks me off? Try living in a society where a flawed, hopeless worldview is constantly shoved down the throats of the next generation by the most powerful propaganda machine ever created (and no, I'm not talking about McDonald's. We'll save that for another time).

Allow me to explain. We live in a media-dominated world. We are constantly bombarded with messages telling us how to live, how to act, what to wear, eat, say, think and do. It's everywhere. Children are being influenced by the media at a younger and younger age. They are being taught everything they know by the most corporate arm of society. Modern media is controlling the western world, and is forcing a system of values and principles on a generation that is searching for guidance. We are finding nothing but empty promises and blind hope in the answers.

Today's media is perfection's home. Of course, everyone wants the nice home, the great family, the white picket fence. But does this ever happen in reality? No, of course not. Life isn't perfect. To paraphrase Thomas Hobbes, life is poor, nasty, cold, brutish and empty. The only place we ever find perfection and a shining sense of optimistic contentment is in the modern media. If we follow through this in a simple, linear manner, we run into a huge philosophical dilemma. If everything we learn (perfection from the media) is not possible in real life (and if you try to tell me that life is perfect, you're more delusional than the people who churn out today's debilitating mass media), then how can we expect to raise a generation of intelligent, realistic humans?

Granted, much of the perfection in the media can't be argued against. Advertisements are what they are, and if it's someone's job to create a false image of society, that's not my issue. That argument has been worn out, and no one will ever reach a practical agreement. But there are aspects of the media that, while not intentionally harmful, are having a devastating effect on today's youth. Examples bound endlessly, but I will focus on one small concept. Much of what children learn today, at least from a practical, informal standpoint, is based on what they see and hear. And given today's societal standards for information gathering practices, I would reason that we have cause to be highly concerned. Translation: Kids get everything from TV and movies, and it's warping their fragile little minds to the point of no return. Corporations like Disney have been churning out sentimental, feel-good movies for decades. By today's media standards, children are concretely learning that, simply by believing and dreaming enough, they can do anything they want. This certainly seems like a noble message, but if we are taking it at face value, and applying it to our lives in a practical manner, this creates a gaping hole between the fantasy world of the media and real world of today. But hey, it's Hollywood. That's what it's all about, right?

Hollywood. I guess that's where it all starts. Just flip to any Disney owned channel- there's enough peppy, happy optimistic cheer to nauseate the most hardened sailor. Take, for example, Disney's High School Musical, or any of their modern Cinderella adaptations (I can't even begin to count how many there are- and I took Calculus. I can count pretty high). Every good guy wins, every villain loses, there's no pain, sorrow or consequences, and everything tidily wraps up just before the commercial break. Sure, that's fine- for entertainment. But today's children are so wrapped around this concept that their lives can be just as perfect as their Disney heros' that they have lost focus on reality of the situation- that success takes hard work, patience, dedication. And sometimes, you just don't win. But I guess that is a lesson that's too painful for our children to learn. We wouldn't want to hurt them, would we? So instead, we hide them behind a cloud of false optimism and meaningless media nonsense.

I was never one for sentimentality. Practical, applied logic has been my proven approach for over eighteen years, and it has served me well. To be frank, that clichéd approach of "following your heart" and seizing the day with blind optimism can only lead to the bitter, empty reality of one too many crushed dreams and far too few goals met. Sure, go ahead, chase after your dreams, hoping that Disney's "if you believe, you can succeed" mentality will carry you through your next crisis. After all, it's only a matter of time before your bank starts taking "dreams" for the mortgage payment.

Hey, Hollywood can do it. Why can't you?