Matt Taibbi, recently in the news, wrote a book a few years back called Hate Inc. In it he analyzed the business model of the modern news media as hooking viewers and readers by confirming their own biases and amplifying them. It brings them success in the current social and technological landscape, but at the price of driving hostilities among the public.
True, and the promotion of hate gets both more deliberate and more desperate―junkie-like―over time. The self-regarding art critic Jerry Saltz illustrates this. (Word to the wise: When Pauline Kael said she only knew one person who voted for Nixon, it wasn't a brag.)
There's another, related, problem, though. Reporting, with a few heartening exceptions, is dead. CNN isn't invested in it the way the scores of shuttered local newspapers were. The lefty newsweeklies that have also been vanishing were better with it than Vox and Gawker. And so on. When there's no one around to look into the details on little stories, narrative becomes the only thing that matters.
2 comments:
Although I haven't read 'Hate, Inc' I've read enough of Taibbi's columns to agree with his conclusion that trust in news media is very low because, instead of just following a story wherever it goes, reporters pick and choose facts depending on what their target audience wants to hear. You're right that it's no way to foster an educated and information rich public. Better to have people fighting with each other than to have them mad enough at you they'll stop reading or watching (this has happened to the networks but they're pretending it's not - ie, CNN).
Never mind the hysteria about Donald Trump, the news media began condescending to the poor and marginalized members of the public long ago. The fact is the poor have been growing more numerous with each passing month as people are being laid off from their jobs in the tech and banking sectors which makes me think there may be a steadily growing audience for Fox News (with the understanding Roger Ailes had a lot to do with starting the disastrous red/blue separation of the populace).
It seems to me that expanding on politically correct points of view will not change the ground realities of our time.
btw: You do have an admirably succinct style in your responses to current subjects of interest.
If I'm being honest I'm only familiar with the book through synopses I've read on it elsewhere. These do sometimes have juicy quotes, though. The media does tell you what you want to hear, or what it thinks you want to hear. Sometimes it goes another way and tells you what someone else wants you to hear, what they want you to "know" article on that topic. The ruling class really does see itself as uniquely worthy of ruling/leading, despite what the evidence says.
The poor are seen as useless passengers who have no right to weigh in on or perhaps even know about the decisions being made. And of course that covers an ever-growing number of people, given both the state of the population and the shifting of definitions.
PC is hung up on its own theories and jargon, often seeing nothing outside of it. But as PKD said, "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."
Thank you. The concision is often a result of my having to get it out before my brain shuts down and I need to sleep.
Post a Comment