The sheer size of the internet and its place in modern society has made it extremely difficult to regulate. Laws of privacy and piracy are broken regularly. In the United States, the right to complain and gossip about politicians is protected under the constitution. Any effort by political parties to control such discussion would be answered with loud public criticism, something politicians don't actively seek out.
Such is not the case in a country like China or other dictatorships in the Middle East. These occasionally squash out vocal bloggers with violence or by blocking access to them. China is rumored to have the largest amount of incarcerated journalists and an Internet police force of 30,000 commentators and monitors of online discussion. Since the Internet was a major tool for rebellions in countries in the Middle East, some governments have responded strongly to Internet political discussion. A report regarding Bahrain's Internet regulation states that, "Bahrain offers a perfect example of successful crackdowns, with an information blackout achieved through an impressive arsenal of repressive measures: exclusion of the foreign media, harassment of human rights defenders, arrests of bloggers and netizens (one of whom died behind bars), prosecutions and defamation campaigns against free expression activists, disruption of communications." With communications made more difficult than ever, life and hope for change isn't getting any easier for the people in these countries.
Some control is exercised in the United States. Take for example the recent case of a marine sergeant who faced dismissal due to his political webpage. The Facebook group was called the, "Armed Forces Tea Party" and was openly critical of Barack Obama. Plenty such pages exist without problem in the U.S. but the difference for this man was his military status. As a member of the military, he is barred from political activities. The president is his commander in chief, a man whose commands he must obey in times of emergency for the sake of the country. The reprimand the marine has received over his page has caused debate regarding the right to expression.
Still, Internet regulation is rare. Even in the dominated countries of the Middle East, Internet discussion is what fueled revolutions that threw off terrible leaders. Chinese activists are not deterred and continue to do what they consider their duty. Despite efforts to silence rebels on and offline, the revolution continues. In countries like the United States, the freedom already exercised would be extremely difficult to completely take over at this point. Free speech is a flood even government control seems unable to stop. Is political content on the Internet largely unregulated? Considering that 25% of Internet users are Chinese, I wouldn't say that's completely true. There are many exceptions, but for the most part, governments have not yet effectively completely regulated Internet commentators.
Sources:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/story/2012-03-22/marine-obama-facebook-free-speech/53697996/1
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/03/20123136140551889.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2005/jun/14/newmedia.china#article_continue
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Thursday, March 8, 2012
Religious Symbolism in Film: Part 2
The character of the Rabbi gives us a peek into the role of this figure for the Jewish community. We see that the Rabbi is consulted on all spiritual matters. He can be asked about technical religious procedures, while also being available to give advice to members of the community. He is not necessarily an intimidating authority, as he jokes with other members.
We see conflicts arrive between members of the community as well as between the community and non-Jewish outsiders. The Jewish members face threats by the non-Jewish military presence, who randomly commit progroms, violent riots against minority groups, to keep them in line and obedient. The military presence shows little respect for the Jewish rituals, even interrupting a wedding with one of these raids. There is a moment where Tevye is warned about the progrom by a military man who sympathizes with the Jews. The man says to him, “You’re an honest, decent person, even if you are a Jew.” To which Tevye later echoes, “If I may say so, it is too bad you aren’t a Jew.” Though the two men have their differences, they can recognize the humanity in each other.
Tevye finds himself caught between religion and his love for his daughters several times. Though none of the daughters denounce their Jewish faith, they go against some common practices of the Jewish community. First, his eldest doesn’t accept the wishes of a matchmaker. The second daughter tells him she will marry with or without his permission. This is difficult for him to accept, as the breach of conduct seems untrue to their religion. He tells her, “Go on, get married and tear out my beard and uncover my head,” relating her decision to other violations of religious symbols. Tevye is lenient with his first two daughters, understanding how their love for their men led them to be unorthodox about wedding procedures. He himself loves his daughters and wants their happiness, so he gives his blessing for both their marriages. Love solves the conflicts.
Tevye rejects Chava for marrying a Christian, comparing accepting them to denying his faith.
The third daughter, Chava commits a blasphemy far worse than the indiscretions of her sisters, she elopes with a Christian boy after her father had told her not to. When she asked his permission, he remarks that the Christian boy, “is a different kind of man. As the good book says, each shall seek his own kind. A bird may love a fish, but where would they build a home together?” He cannot accept that Chava has married outside the faith, as he believes that approving of this would be denying his own faith. Instead he tells his wife that, “Chava is dead to us, we will forget her.” Though Chava’s love has made her look beyond the differences of the Christian boy, it cannot lead her father to put these differences aside.
Tevye explains to us the meaning of the fiddler on the roof for the people of Anatevka. They live with challenges on all sides, poverty, military presence and a changing and invading outside world. Their faith and traditions are what helps them keep their balance as they try to play a harmonious tune of happiness in an unsteady place. He says “Because of our traditions every one of us knows who he is, and what God expects him to do.” In this statement he seems to underline the meaning of religion for so many individuals, regardless of the technicalities of different faiths. Spirituality provides guidance and explanations for those puzzled with the meaning of life’s ups and downs. Though Tevye questions the hardships god puts him through, he never loses his faith.
Religious Symbolism in Film: Part 1
questioning god with Tevye in Fiddler on the Roof
Fiddler on the Roof was such a popular musical that it manifested quickly into a movie. Like most popular quality films, it gained such a following because large audiences could sympathize with its characters. They understood the feelings of Tevye and of his daughters. A great shift in culture occurred during the 60’s and 70’s from the conservative mentality of parents and grandparents to the rebellious active attitudes of the youths. Tevye, a poor Jewish man in the town of Anatevka at the beginning of the 20th century, has to try to understand the great changes that are going on around him. His daughters are going against the traditions he clings to so tightly, and the outside world and authorities beyond the Jewish faith are forcing hardship upon his community. Because tradition is a central theme of the film, and of great value to our main character, we learn a lot about the practices of the Jewish faith.
The films opening sequence.
The film’s opening sequence alone is overflowing with symbols. We see flashes of the inside of the town’s Jewish temple. The walls are covered with beautiful old murals. These painted images include bulls, scorpions, scales and foliage that surround text written in Hebrew scripture. We also see the Star of David both painted and sewn onto cloth. There is also a Menorah, without candles, as it isn’t the time of Hannukah. The temple seems to be gilded with gold or some other metal in some places. Anatevka is a poor town, so the fact that such metals would be used to enrich the beauty of the temple shows the dedication of the people for their religion. The wooden walls of the temple are also beautifully carved into swoops and swirls.
Tevye even cuts in to explain some symbols and beliefs to us in the opening sequence. As Tevye works delivering milk to customers, he explains that “Here in Anatevka we have traditions for everything, how to sleep, …eat, …work, even how to wear clothes. We always keep our head covered and always wear a little prayer shawl. This shows our constant devotion to God.” Almost all of the men also have beards, as shaving is forbidden in the Torah in Leviticus 19:27. Tevye quotes “the good book” several times during the film, as he has a passion for studying it, though he has little time to do so. We also learn that at the age of 3 boys attend Hebrew school and that the men of the family are meant to study the holy book.
As the story progresses we observe several rituals and practices. One of the first is that of the matchmaker pairing young men and women for marriage rather than deciding themselves. The father must then approve the match. The wedding is the next step. It happens after sunset, with the whole village bearing candles to light the event. The couple must stand under a canopy. Rings are exchanged. The groom breaks a glass under his foot. The couple is lifted on chairs by wedding attendees. Gifts are given to the bride and groom by the bride’s parents. At this point in the scene, arguments break out as it is revealed that the couple decided to get married out of love, rather than trusting the matchmaker’s suggestion. Making the moment more controversial is a young man who asks girl to dance, a scandalous suggestion in this community of strict Jewish faith. This moment is also an example of religious conflict, as though the boy is Jewish, he has a different interpretation of what should be acceptable for members of the Jewish faith.
Another ritual we observe is the Sabbath. The mother tells her children to hurry to prepare themselves and the table, because the ritual must be performed in the few minutes before sundown on Friday. When everyone is settled and standing around the table, the mother lights two candles in silence then places her hands over her eyes and face as if crying. The parents then begin to say prayers. They may also sing songs, as the Sabbath is meant to be sacred but also a period of joy and reflection. It is a time when family and friends gather to remember and reflect on their faith while also rewarding themselves with leisure time.
Fiddler on the Roof was such a popular musical that it manifested quickly into a movie. Like most popular quality films, it gained such a following because large audiences could sympathize with its characters. They understood the feelings of Tevye and of his daughters. A great shift in culture occurred during the 60’s and 70’s from the conservative mentality of parents and grandparents to the rebellious active attitudes of the youths. Tevye, a poor Jewish man in the town of Anatevka at the beginning of the 20th century, has to try to understand the great changes that are going on around him. His daughters are going against the traditions he clings to so tightly, and the outside world and authorities beyond the Jewish faith are forcing hardship upon his community. Because tradition is a central theme of the film, and of great value to our main character, we learn a lot about the practices of the Jewish faith.
The films opening sequence.
The film’s opening sequence alone is overflowing with symbols. We see flashes of the inside of the town’s Jewish temple. The walls are covered with beautiful old murals. These painted images include bulls, scorpions, scales and foliage that surround text written in Hebrew scripture. We also see the Star of David both painted and sewn onto cloth. There is also a Menorah, without candles, as it isn’t the time of Hannukah. The temple seems to be gilded with gold or some other metal in some places. Anatevka is a poor town, so the fact that such metals would be used to enrich the beauty of the temple shows the dedication of the people for their religion. The wooden walls of the temple are also beautifully carved into swoops and swirls.
Tevye even cuts in to explain some symbols and beliefs to us in the opening sequence. As Tevye works delivering milk to customers, he explains that “Here in Anatevka we have traditions for everything, how to sleep, …eat, …work, even how to wear clothes. We always keep our head covered and always wear a little prayer shawl. This shows our constant devotion to God.” Almost all of the men also have beards, as shaving is forbidden in the Torah in Leviticus 19:27. Tevye quotes “the good book” several times during the film, as he has a passion for studying it, though he has little time to do so. We also learn that at the age of 3 boys attend Hebrew school and that the men of the family are meant to study the holy book.
As the story progresses we observe several rituals and practices. One of the first is that of the matchmaker pairing young men and women for marriage rather than deciding themselves. The father must then approve the match. The wedding is the next step. It happens after sunset, with the whole village bearing candles to light the event. The couple must stand under a canopy. Rings are exchanged. The groom breaks a glass under his foot. The couple is lifted on chairs by wedding attendees. Gifts are given to the bride and groom by the bride’s parents. At this point in the scene, arguments break out as it is revealed that the couple decided to get married out of love, rather than trusting the matchmaker’s suggestion. Making the moment more controversial is a young man who asks girl to dance, a scandalous suggestion in this community of strict Jewish faith. This moment is also an example of religious conflict, as though the boy is Jewish, he has a different interpretation of what should be acceptable for members of the Jewish faith.
Another ritual we observe is the Sabbath. The mother tells her children to hurry to prepare themselves and the table, because the ritual must be performed in the few minutes before sundown on Friday. When everyone is settled and standing around the table, the mother lights two candles in silence then places her hands over her eyes and face as if crying. The parents then begin to say prayers. They may also sing songs, as the Sabbath is meant to be sacred but also a period of joy and reflection. It is a time when family and friends gather to remember and reflect on their faith while also rewarding themselves with leisure time.
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
The Influence of Film on American Society: Part 2
Fighting corruption with Mr. Smith
The second film we’ll look at is the 1939 Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. Don’t let the title fool you, the work is anything but naïve. The story revolves around the character of Mr. Jefferson (Jeff) Smith who is elected as a junior senator to replace one who passed away. He arrives in Washington believing in the virtues of American government. He visits the Washington memorial in deep reverence of the god that was Abraham Lincoln, and believes that the congress is in fact a body “by the people, for the people.” He soon discovers that his efforts to create social projects are thwarted by corrupt officials out for profit, and seeks to expose them against all odds.
The film was released just 2 months after World War II broke out in Europe, a time of extreme political tension and a moment when government decisions were already under scrutiny. In 1942, when German-occupied France was forced to ban American films, some theatre chose to show Mr. Smith at their last screening. It is rumored that one theatre showed the film for 30 days nonstop after the ban was announced.
TodayMr. Smith continues to be watched and critically acclaimed. It has been called the quintessential whistle blower film. It is considered one of the best works of the director and one of the best performances by the leading man,James Stewart.
Both films borrowed heavily from observed realities within American society. Their situations were based upon events the screenwriters had read in newspapers and textbooks, not mere fiction. They rang true to the situation that people were living, and those same people responded to the films because of that. The emotional reactions were strong, provoking tough critics and adoring fans. They spoke so directly to the heart of people that could relate to their content,that they actually managed to effect culture and society, instead of just being a product of the two. They are proof that a movie can influence American culture and behavior.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
The Influence of Film on American Society: Part 1
Playing chicken with Rebel
Film and society have a complex relationship of give and take. Primarily, because film is more often impacted by society than society is by film. Film so often takes its central themes from social issues or cultural elements. It is only a rare and extraordinary film that manages to cause a shift in behavior in society. It is also a complex relationship because the impact of a film can be hard to measure. When the Occupy Wall Street protests began, no one heard the people citing Inside Job, the Oscar award winning documentary about Wall Street’s role in the 2008 economic crisis, as a motivation. In retrospect it does seem to be a likely influence. Also, different movies affect different masses of people. The 2006 film, Quinceañera might have meant a lot to Latino-American youths, but didn’t reach the average suburban Caucasian teenager. None the less, I will illustrate how two films have influenced American society in significant, notable ways.
Both films are from prior 1960, and both were banned from movie theatres at some point. They were critical in nature of elements of American civilization, and were thus revered by some and loathed by others. Strong films often achieve this love-hate relationship with viewers, as the truth can be hard to take. I’m talking of the 1955 movie Rebel Without a Cause and the 1939 movie Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.
Rebel Without a Cause continues to echo through American youth today, but it meant even more for the adolescents of its time. Teenagers in the 1950’s were under an enormous amount of pressure. If one watches the educational videos from the era, they instruct family’s to behave with perfect cooperation and respect, leaving little space for open communication. The post-war U.S. sought to be the image of an ideal nation while all others were dealing with the horrific aftermath, and wanted its children to match the image. Teenagers were meanwhile being raised by parents who had witnessed the horrors of war, in some cases scarred by being in combat or losing family members. Children were expected to be perfect and were told their world was perfect, but they saw a very different picture, producing confusion and anger.
This is why Rebel was so immensely popular. The film depicts three principle teenagers who live in suburban America. Two of them have seemingly normal families who are in fact dysfunctional, and the other has been practically abandoned by his parents to be raised in a mansion by his maid. They smoke, drink, get into fights, race cars and break into private property as an outlet of their angst. Together, they find family in each other as they escape their parents. It was one of the first films to depict teenagers in these rebellious roles. The violent nature of some scenes managed to get the film banned from several cities. It was thought that the film would be a bad influence on adolescents. In fact, it was. The film gave teenagers a voice that they continued to express throughout the 60’s and 70’s by protesting and banning together in a love of freedom and rebellion against the establishment. The screenwriter Stewart Stern who worked on the screenplay for Rebel said, “The creation of the family in Rebel Without a Cause was ultimately the creation of the family at Woodstock.”
The cultural effect of the film is absolute undeniable. The costume of the main character, the red jacket, white t-shirt, blue jeans and black boots of James Stark, became the uniform for the rebellious teenage male of the time. In 1956, the year after Rebel’s release, Hollywood produce 10 films of similar rebellious teen themes. In 1957, there were forty such movies released. Fans continue to show up to screenings of Rebel dressed like the characters 50 years later. European youths also loved the rebellious characters. Germany and Poland soon produced their own versions of James Dean’s character of James Stark, Horst Bucholz and Zbigniew Cybulski, respectively.
Rebel heard the distraught masses and spoke to them. Its immense popularity and effects on society and cultural have made it and its characters and actors legendary. It continues to be watched and loved half a century later, with similar meaning for contemporary audiences. I myself adore the film and its artistic innovations, its strong production elements and its heartbreaking story.
Film and society have a complex relationship of give and take. Primarily, because film is more often impacted by society than society is by film. Film so often takes its central themes from social issues or cultural elements. It is only a rare and extraordinary film that manages to cause a shift in behavior in society. It is also a complex relationship because the impact of a film can be hard to measure. When the Occupy Wall Street protests began, no one heard the people citing Inside Job, the Oscar award winning documentary about Wall Street’s role in the 2008 economic crisis, as a motivation. In retrospect it does seem to be a likely influence. Also, different movies affect different masses of people. The 2006 film, Quinceañera might have meant a lot to Latino-American youths, but didn’t reach the average suburban Caucasian teenager. None the less, I will illustrate how two films have influenced American society in significant, notable ways.
Both films are from prior 1960, and both were banned from movie theatres at some point. They were critical in nature of elements of American civilization, and were thus revered by some and loathed by others. Strong films often achieve this love-hate relationship with viewers, as the truth can be hard to take. I’m talking of the 1955 movie Rebel Without a Cause and the 1939 movie Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.
Rebel Without a Cause continues to echo through American youth today, but it meant even more for the adolescents of its time. Teenagers in the 1950’s were under an enormous amount of pressure. If one watches the educational videos from the era, they instruct family’s to behave with perfect cooperation and respect, leaving little space for open communication. The post-war U.S. sought to be the image of an ideal nation while all others were dealing with the horrific aftermath, and wanted its children to match the image. Teenagers were meanwhile being raised by parents who had witnessed the horrors of war, in some cases scarred by being in combat or losing family members. Children were expected to be perfect and were told their world was perfect, but they saw a very different picture, producing confusion and anger.This is why Rebel was so immensely popular. The film depicts three principle teenagers who live in suburban America. Two of them have seemingly normal families who are in fact dysfunctional, and the other has been practically abandoned by his parents to be raised in a mansion by his maid. They smoke, drink, get into fights, race cars and break into private property as an outlet of their angst. Together, they find family in each other as they escape their parents. It was one of the first films to depict teenagers in these rebellious roles. The violent nature of some scenes managed to get the film banned from several cities. It was thought that the film would be a bad influence on adolescents. In fact, it was. The film gave teenagers a voice that they continued to express throughout the 60’s and 70’s by protesting and banning together in a love of freedom and rebellion against the establishment. The screenwriter Stewart Stern who worked on the screenplay for Rebel said, “The creation of the family in Rebel Without a Cause was ultimately the creation of the family at Woodstock.”
The cultural effect of the film is absolute undeniable. The costume of the main character, the red jacket, white t-shirt, blue jeans and black boots of James Stark, became the uniform for the rebellious teenage male of the time. In 1956, the year after Rebel’s release, Hollywood produce 10 films of similar rebellious teen themes. In 1957, there were forty such movies released. Fans continue to show up to screenings of Rebel dressed like the characters 50 years later. European youths also loved the rebellious characters. Germany and Poland soon produced their own versions of James Dean’s character of James Stark, Horst Bucholz and Zbigniew Cybulski, respectively.
Rebel heard the distraught masses and spoke to them. Its immense popularity and effects on society and cultural have made it and its characters and actors legendary. It continues to be watched and loved half a century later, with similar meaning for contemporary audiences. I myself adore the film and its artistic innovations, its strong production elements and its heartbreaking story.
Film Fanaticism Ahead!
INT. ANYA'S ROOM - NIGHT
(She sits at her desk typing away at the laptop. The desk and room are disordered with books, DVD's, water bottles, trash and clothes. Her step brother plays random audible guitar chords in the next room. We see that she writes...)
I love that I get to analyze great movies for some assignments. Whether I'm combing them for religious symbolism or signs of American culture, it's so exciting to uncover the secret meanings of great works of art. It's also surprisingly easy. When asked to analyze movies from one aspect or another I always find myself stretching my word limits, because the more themes I come to understand, the more evidence I find to support them. Grab your popcorn and look out for the upcoming film essays! Engaging new perspectives on classics should be mildly entertaining.
Monday, March 5, 2012
The Internet's Revolution of News
The Internet gives any individual the tools to be an amateur reporter, which can be a good and a bad thing for the public. Blogs, personal web sites and social networking sites allow anybody to make their opinion public, encouraging free speech. Snippets of events can be reported immediately by the instantaneous uploading of videos from cell phones or tweets relaying happenings moment to moment.
But the fact that anybody can say or post anything they want without consequence leaves a large potential for error and bias. Individuals have the legal right to spread almost any rumor, as long as the accusations aren't very serious. Matt Drudge could spread celebrity gossip without much regard for the emotions or right to privacy of the individuals in the spotlight, but commentators on RateMDs.com couldn't have legally stated that a doctor had killed two patients unless such a statement was supported by the courts. As individuals uploading their opinions and "facts" for free don't have the financial incentive to keep audiences, they don't care if they turn people away by being incorrect. A site like Huffington Post self-polices the articles and statements it uploads, because to not do so could cost the site readership and eventually its advertisers.
The freedom the internet affords the individual to report on news or comment on events is a double edged sword. Freedom of expression and creativity are encouraged. The experiences of some people, such as citizens abused in dictator ruled countries in the Middle East, would not have been shared other wise. But these same people can also lie without serious consequences. News is immediately relayed by people on the ground as it happens, bringing new opportunities for real investigative reporting, but it might not be entirely accurate. The presence of independent amateur reporters on blogs and social networking sites is a resource that can improve our understanding of events, but their statements should be double checked by readers who are conscious of the potential for false information or biased reporting.
Sources:
-Vivian, John. The Media of Mass Communication.
But the fact that anybody can say or post anything they want without consequence leaves a large potential for error and bias. Individuals have the legal right to spread almost any rumor, as long as the accusations aren't very serious. Matt Drudge could spread celebrity gossip without much regard for the emotions or right to privacy of the individuals in the spotlight, but commentators on RateMDs.com couldn't have legally stated that a doctor had killed two patients unless such a statement was supported by the courts. As individuals uploading their opinions and "facts" for free don't have the financial incentive to keep audiences, they don't care if they turn people away by being incorrect. A site like Huffington Post self-polices the articles and statements it uploads, because to not do so could cost the site readership and eventually its advertisers.
The freedom the internet affords the individual to report on news or comment on events is a double edged sword. Freedom of expression and creativity are encouraged. The experiences of some people, such as citizens abused in dictator ruled countries in the Middle East, would not have been shared other wise. But these same people can also lie without serious consequences. News is immediately relayed by people on the ground as it happens, bringing new opportunities for real investigative reporting, but it might not be entirely accurate. The presence of independent amateur reporters on blogs and social networking sites is a resource that can improve our understanding of events, but their statements should be double checked by readers who are conscious of the potential for false information or biased reporting.
Sources:
-Vivian, John. The Media of Mass Communication.
How News Became Objective
One of the first demands for objective reporting rose from the penny papers of the 19th century. The economic model of the papers targeted mass audiences. The masses at the time were not highly educated, and thus would have found it difficult to follow opinionated commentary and critical essays. A larger audience was also more likely to have varied political tendencies and traditions, so articles free from specific political leanings were more popular. Thus articles became less opinionated and were based more on fact. They took on a story-telling format to cater to a people that sought entertainment in stories, and straight forwardness in reporting.
When newspapers joined together to become the Associated Press they were pooling resources to cut costs on getting news stories, and ended up changing the way news was released. They wanted to share the costs of receiving reports from far away, particularly from the Mexican-American war that was happening in the western United States at the time. The cooperative was a force to be reckoned with, benefiting all its members. The fact that newspapers began to share reporters and stories demanded an extra layer of objectivity in the way stories were reported and written. The newspapers' audiences were spread across a large spectrum of opinions, so the stories had to appeal to that variation of opinions by being more fact oriented. The Associated Press was also managed by Melville Stone from 1893 to 1921. He allegedly had high standard of integrity and impartiality which he demanded of reporters and other members of the press, furthering the advancement of objectivity through the media.
Newspapers grew in size and importance in American society. Literacy and education slowly improved, increasing readership. Business expanded and offered more money for advertising. Newspapers became the central source of information on everything from politics to culture until other medias began to push it out of the way. The potentiality for success in the newspaper industry created pressure for higher standards. There were more competitors, so papers had to be careful not to anger readers with over-opinionated articles or false facts. Advertisers became increasingly important for financing news organizations, whether on the radio, television or paper. As advertisers were attracted to large audiences, and gaining a mass audience required opinion, reporters were increasingly required to keep their sentiments out of stories. Facts was what culturally diverse, economy driven Americans wanted, so facts they were given.
Sources:
-Vivian, John. The Media of Mass Communication.
-http://www.ap.org/pages/about/history/history.html
-http://www.cpb.org/aboutcpb/goals/objectivity/whitepapers/cpb_BestPractices_Kaplan.pdf
When newspapers joined together to become the Associated Press they were pooling resources to cut costs on getting news stories, and ended up changing the way news was released. They wanted to share the costs of receiving reports from far away, particularly from the Mexican-American war that was happening in the western United States at the time. The cooperative was a force to be reckoned with, benefiting all its members. The fact that newspapers began to share reporters and stories demanded an extra layer of objectivity in the way stories were reported and written. The newspapers' audiences were spread across a large spectrum of opinions, so the stories had to appeal to that variation of opinions by being more fact oriented. The Associated Press was also managed by Melville Stone from 1893 to 1921. He allegedly had high standard of integrity and impartiality which he demanded of reporters and other members of the press, furthering the advancement of objectivity through the media.
Newspapers grew in size and importance in American society. Literacy and education slowly improved, increasing readership. Business expanded and offered more money for advertising. Newspapers became the central source of information on everything from politics to culture until other medias began to push it out of the way. The potentiality for success in the newspaper industry created pressure for higher standards. There were more competitors, so papers had to be careful not to anger readers with over-opinionated articles or false facts. Advertisers became increasingly important for financing news organizations, whether on the radio, television or paper. As advertisers were attracted to large audiences, and gaining a mass audience required opinion, reporters were increasingly required to keep their sentiments out of stories. Facts was what culturally diverse, economy driven Americans wanted, so facts they were given.
Sources:
-Vivian, John. The Media of Mass Communication.
-http://www.ap.org/pages/about/history/history.html
-http://www.cpb.org/aboutcpb/goals/objectivity/whitepapers/cpb_BestPractices_Kaplan.pdf
It Starts at the Beginning
Welcome! This is the first entry of Penny For Your Thoughts, the breaking blog about issues and elements of our civilization. Enjoy talking about the big questions and the little people that make up this spinning world.
Penny For Your Thoughts aims to generate intelligent discussion on vital, and sometimes just interesting, cultural and political phenomenon. Please comment, especially if you don't agree. I'll be uploading mostly essays I have to write for my university classes. The fact that what I write will be analyzed by academic scholars, should assure you that I will do my best to be factual and unbiased. I'll also include my sources. Please don't plagiarize! Paraphrasing is fine.
For snippets of opinion and quotes, follow me on Twitter as Avey13. I'm also an artist and writer of fiction, and you can check out my work at http://avey13.deviantart.com/.
Penny For Your Thoughts aims to generate intelligent discussion on vital, and sometimes just interesting, cultural and political phenomenon. Please comment, especially if you don't agree. I'll be uploading mostly essays I have to write for my university classes. The fact that what I write will be analyzed by academic scholars, should assure you that I will do my best to be factual and unbiased. I'll also include my sources. Please don't plagiarize! Paraphrasing is fine.
For snippets of opinion and quotes, follow me on Twitter as Avey13. I'm also an artist and writer of fiction, and you can check out my work at http://avey13.deviantart.com/.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)