Role Of Media In Modern Society

1 Aug 2010

Inspired by other threads as so often these things are
http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/swingers-forum/viewtopic/310624.html (p4, onwards)
Has it changed?
Are they leading us into the abyss?
Are they becoming our masters?
We now have 24 hr news, embedded journalists with the army, your thoughts please

1 Aug 2010

You would think wouldn't you that I'd have so much to say here......but I've said it all recently,so not wanting to bore you all by repeating it I'll let someone else start....I shall I'm sure return :twisted:

1 Aug 2010

There is a lot more than there used to be. My feeling is that that just means there is a lot more shite to filter out before you get to the good stuff. Although how you can be sure you pick the rioght good stuff - I don't know.

1 Aug 2010

I think its only worth reading one newspaper a week at the most, usually one of the weekenders. the rest of the week the same articles and opinions are recycled and represented on different days.
Their role continues as news providers for the different sections of society. in this they use different languages and intellect.
oddly enough the majority are all produced in the same print factory. there must be times when the staff of one newspaper do overtime for another or even a competitor.

1 Aug 2010

Quote by Bluefish2009
Inspired by other threads as so often these things are
Has it changed?
Are they leading us into the abyss?
Are they becoming our masters?
We now have 24 hr news, embedded journalists with the army, your thoughts please

Oooooooh, you first!

1 Aug 2010

Quote by Bluefish2009
Inspired by other threads as so often these things are
Has it changed?
Are they leading us into the abyss?
Are they becoming our masters?
We now have 24 hr news, embedded journalists with the army, your thoughts please

The media has created 'celebrities' out of the likes of Jade Goody, Jordan, various WAG's, Paris Hilton, the list goes on.
The internet and broadcast media has fuelled people's 'desire' to have *cough* news, gossip, sports etc NOW, and despite such wonderful technology (mobile phones that access the internet, televisions that also access the internet) a multitude of broadcast channels, shows like 'Big Brother' has given us conclusive proof that we have 'dumbed down', and that we aren't maximising this technology in a positive way, instant, short and mindless entertainment has won against a thirst for knowledge that is fast slipping away.
To answer your questions, the media is a devil that society has helped to create.

1 Aug 2010

Quote by foxylady2209
There is a lot more than there used to be. My feeling is that that just means there is a lot more shite to filter out before you get to the good stuff. Although how you can be sure you pick the rioght good stuff - I don't know.

Perhaps the trick is, getting to the truth rather than the good stuff dunno

Quote by duncanlondon
I think its only worth reading one newspaper a week at the most, usually one of the weekenders. the rest of the week the same articles and opinions are recycled and represented on different days.
Their role continues as news providers for the different sections of society. in this they use different languages and intellect.
oddly enough the majority are all produced in the same print factory. there must be times when the staff of one newspaper do overtime for another or even a competitor.

I do not buy a news paper at all most of my news comes through news channels such as the BBC, Sky, Al Jazeera, CNN etc. I also enjoy the Parliament channel, question time and other political programs where news can be gleaned

Quote by Freckledbird
Inspired by other threads as so often these things are
Has it changed?
Are they leading us into the abyss?
Are they becoming our masters?
We now have 24 hr news, embedded journalists with the army, your thoughts please

Oooooooh, you first!
No, I insist!

Quote by essex34m
Inspired by other threads as so often these things are
Has it changed?
Are they leading us into the abyss?
Are they becoming our masters?
We now have 24 hr news, embedded journalists with the army, your thoughts please

The media has created 'celebrities' out of the likes of Jade Goody, Jordan, various WAG's, Paris Hilton, the list goes on.
The internet and broadcast media has fuelled people's 'desire' to have *cough* news, gossip, sports etc NOW, and despite such wonderful technology (mobile phones that access the internet, televisions that also access the internet) a multitude of broadcast channels, shows like 'Big Brother' has given us conclusive proof that we have 'dumbed down', and that we aren't maximising this technology in a positive way, instant, short and mindless entertainment has won against a thirst for knowledge that is fast slipping away.
To answer your questions, the media is a devil that society has helped to create.
Interesting Essex, having this very discussion with other contributers from this site who feel much the same, in fact go further in saying many journalist are puppets of their pay-masters..... If this is the case is this a new phenomenon? Its not an area I have a great deal of experience in

1 Aug 2010

Quote by Bluefish2009
Interesting Essex, having this very discussion with other contributers from this site who feel much the same, in fact go further in saying many journalist are puppets of their pay-masters..... If this is the case is this a new phenomenon? Its not an area I have a great deal of experience in

Did you ever watch 'Spitting Image'?
The puppets of the journalists wore long black coats, Trilby's on their head, and resembled pigs (nose in the trough reference maybe?) Their integrity has long been held in the same esteem as estate agents, lawyers etc.
I don't know about anything before that, I am only *cough* 34 *cough*

2 Aug 2010

But hasn't quite a lot of 'news' become something which is produced by people themselves by using networking sites? ie they can feed themselves with info, whilst remaining switched off from the rest of the world.

2 Aug 2010

Quote by duncanlondon
But hasn't quite a lot of 'news' become something which is produced by people themselves by using networking sites? ie they can feed themselves with info, whilst remaining switched off from the rest of the world.

Three points.
Embedded journalists are nothing new - think Churchill in the Boer War.
Tabloids have always been trash - even before they were tabloids - the Daily Mail was built on it, and the News of the World created a whole school of sensationalist journalism brilliantly described by Orwell in Decline of the English Murder.
What social networking has done is de-localized gossip. Now people can gossip when they choose, with people wherever they like, and that requires a common vocabulary and cast list, which reality tv provides. But is Jade Goody any different in her role in public life to, say, the Duchess of Argyll or Christine Keiller? Or Alice Kepple or one of the notorious Victorian courtesans?

2 Aug 2010

I do not buy a news paper at all most of my news comes through news channels such as the BBC, Sky, Al Jazeera, CNN etc. I also enjoy the Parliament channel, question time and other political programs where news can be gleaned

yep i`m much the same blue
a great man once told me two things
the first was "don`t believe any thing you read and only half of what you see "
the second was " you will only ever encounter two problems in your life .the first will be money problems , the second will be women problems both are linked and normally come hand in hand "
not sure he wasn`t right you know
bolt

2 Aug 2010

Well Blue I shall answer your question.
Yes of course it has a role to play in modern society.
The anti media haters would much rather things that we read about on a daily basis, were covered up....hushed under the carpet.
The MP's expense scandal or the banks, we would never have known about had SOME wanted their way.
The media for sure have become powerful, but no more powerful than the unions used to be, but for the Socialists amongst us that is perfectly acceptable.
The unions who had the same ammount of power, were liars also and lets be honest here, they constantly tried to bring the country to it's knees.
Socialists hate the media or at least a huge majority do ( unless it is the Tory hating Mirror), but like everything else Blue, they believe what they want to believe and ridicule anyone who does not agree with their lines of thought.
Lets have a look at the facts of daily newspaper sales...
Last months DAILY sales were eleven and a half million sales per day, and that does NOT include the Sunday sales in that.
That is a lot of people who buy newspapers. I will not bore you with individual figures for each paper, but let us say that the two that people seem to hate the most on here, are the Mail and the Sun...a combined total of over five million sales per DAY, not including Sunday sales.
Now on those figures it is obvious that the media do have an important role to play...unless you are a hater of Murdoch which feck there are a few on this website.
Over the years Blue I have had many arguements with people on here who firstly used to slate the Sun, and now the Mail has overtaken that hate.
Like anything in life when it becomes a huge industry it will always then have it's knockers. The papers play an important role in letting people know the news and of course that is sometimes blurred with some inaccuracies but....they are there to sell papers and that is no different to selling anything as you want to make your product sell.
There are always people who as media haters or Murdoch haters, take your pick,will pick holes in anything they write but I never saw anyone pick holes in the journalism that brought about the MP's scandal or the banks. I never heard anyone say that was a load of bollocks.
Would we all like to have a media that was told what to say and when to say it? The press have the freedoms that so many hate and would try to curtail at every opportunity, unless of course it is of interest to them.
Eleven plus million readers and buyers of newspapers on a daily basis, enjoy what they buy and read, and on that basis alone then yes.....it has a huge role to play in modern society.
Btw Blue....I will not say what the Guardians daily sales are. wink

but about on the lines of Woman's weekly.
Watch them all come out of the woodwork now Blue....the Murdoch haters.

2 Aug 2010

A thoroughbred Capitalist, and that is why he is hated so much by people who have nothing or very little....the haters of success!!

Plus no doubt many more.

2 Aug 2010

Quote by awayman
But hasn't quite a lot of 'news' become something which is produced by people themselves by using networking sites? ie they can feed themselves with info, whilst remaining switched off from the rest of the world.

Three points.
Embedded journalists are nothing new - think Churchill in the Boer War.
Tabloids have always been trash - even before they were tabloids - the Daily Mail was built on it, and the News of the World created a whole school of sensationalist journalism brilliantly described by Orwell in Decline of the English Murder.
What social networking has done is de-localized gossip. Now people can gossip when they choose, with people wherever they like, and that requires a common vocabulary and cast list, which reality tv provides. But is Jade Goody any different in her role in public life to, say, the Duchess of Argyll or Christine Keiller? Or Alice Kepple or one of the notorious Victorian courtesans?
Not new I agree, but instant, which is very new

2 Aug 2010

Quote by kentswingers777
Well Blue I shall answer your question.
Yes of course it has a role to play in modern society.
The anti media haters would much rather things that we read about on a daily basis, were covered up....hushed under the carpet.
The MP's expense scandal or the banks, we would never have known about had SOME wanted their way.
The media for sure have become powerful, but no more powerful than the unions used to be, but for the Socialists amongst us that is perfectly acceptable.
The unions who had the same ammount of power, were liars also and lets be honest here, they constantly tried to bring the country to it's knees.
Socialists hate the media or at least a huge majority do ( unless it is the Tory hating Mirror), but like everything else Blue, they believe what they want to believe and ridicule anyone who does not agree with their lines of thought.
Lets have a look at the facts of daily newspaper sales...
Last months DAILY sales were eleven and a half million sales per day, and that does NOT include the Sunday sales in that.
That is a lot of people who buy newspapers. I will not bore you with individual figures for each paper, but let us say that the two that people seem to hate the most on here, are the Mail and the Sun...a combined total of over five million sales per DAY, not including Sunday sales.
Now on those figures it is obvious that the media do have an important role to play...unless you are a hater of Murdoch which feck there are a few on this website.
Over the years Blue I have had many arguements with people on here who firstly used to slate the Sun, and now the Mail has overtaken that hate.
Like anything in life when it becomes a huge industry it will always then have it's knockers. The papers play an important role in letting people know the news and of course that is sometimes blurred with some inaccuracies but....they are there to sell papers and that is no different to selling anything as you want to make your product sell.
There are always people who as media haters or Murdoch haters, take your pick,will pick holes in anything they write but I never saw anyone pick holes in the journalism that brought about the MP's scandal or the banks. I never heard anyone say that was a load of bollocks.
Would we all like to have a media that was told what to say and when to say it? The press have the freedoms that so many hate and would try to curtail at every opportunity, unless of course it is of interest to them.
Eleven plus million readers and buyers of newspapers on a daily basis, enjoy what they buy and read, and on that basis alone then yes.....it has a huge role to play in modern society.
Btw Blue....I will not say what the Guardians daily sales are. but about on the lines of Woman's weekly.
Watch them all come out of the woodwork now Blue....the Murdoch haters.

Thank you Kenty, interesting post
One thing that does stand out in your post, Is the meadia free to report what they wish and with the slant they wish, I ask as I do not know?

2 Aug 2010

"Would we all like to have a media that was told what to say and when to say it?"
We already have one....and if you really really can't see that the press follow an editorial policy dictated by their owners then I shall walk away in despair at my fellow man......this line alone makes me feel that this arguement has died already

2 Aug 2010

Quote by Staggerlee_BB

"Would we all like to have a media that was told what to say and when to say it?"
We already have one....and if you really really can't see that the press follow an editorial policy dictated by their owners then I shall walk away in despair at my fellow man......this line alone makes me feel that this arguement has died already

My thought was that they mainly all report the same story but with their political slant in mind, would that be fair? dunno

2 Aug 2010

To some extent......but more important is the fact that it serves the owners vanity and commercial interests....it is never mentioned in the Express that Richard Desmond owns a porn empire....it is never mentioned in the Telegraph that the Barclays are tax exiles on Sark. Both papers are excoriating about other porn barons or tax exiles,coincidence?
The Barclays are particularly good at sending solicitors letters to anyone who dares to even mention them in the media......from the owners of the Telegraph ffs!!! and absolutely no hint of fucking irony....Desmond similarly is more than willing to sue those who call his T.V. X etc. empire pornography despite having received repeated warnings from the T.V. watchdog about it containing R18 rated material (i.e. porn) again no hint of irony
I shan't mention Murdoch.....there isn't enough room on the fucking internet

2 Aug 2010

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
To some extent......but more important is the fact that it serves the owners vanity and commercial interests....it is never mentioned in the Express that Richard Desmond owns a porn empire....it is never mentioned in the Telegraph that the Barclays are tax exiles on Sark. Both papers are excoriating about other porn barons or tax exiles,coincidence?
The Barclays are particularly good at sending solicitors letters to anyone who dares to even mention them in the media......from the owners of the Telegraph ffs!!! and absolutely no hint of fucking irony....Desmond similarly is more than willing to sue those who call his T.V. X etc. empire pornography despite having received repeated warnings from the T.V. watchdog about it containing R18 rated material (i.e. porn) again no hint of irony
I shan't mention Murdoch.....there isn't enough room on the fucking internet

I get the feeling that was wriiten with passion and without stopping to draw breath!
But why does their shenanigans irk you so much? Or why the hell does it not bother me at all?

2 Aug 2010

Their position gives them power that they have not earned and do not deserve and they abuse it.....they are answerable to no-one but themselves,they cannot be deselected they are not elected and yet they wield their influence on all political parties to dictate policy to the benefit of no-one but themselves....if there is such a thing as evil they are the face of it.
As I mentioned elsewhere it is a fool or a masochist who does not object to being buggered by steely dan unlubricated..a slave asks if he's pleasing his master....
I am none of the above

2 Aug 2010

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
Their position gives them power that they have not earned and do not deserve and they abuse it.....they are answerable to no-one but themselves,they cannot be deselected they are not elected and yet they wield their influence on all political parties to dictate policy to the benefit of no-one but themselves....if there is such a thing as evil they are the face of it.
As I mentioned elsewhere it is a fool or a masochist who does not object to being buggered by steely dan unlubricated..a slave asks if he's pleasing his master....
I am none of the above

Do you not know how that above comment sounds?
That comment has nothing to do with a Socialistic outlook, but purely a jealous and twisted view on people who have lots.
There was no doubt a time when Murdoch had nothing or very little, yet has built up an empire, which is what people like you despise. I cannot see any reason for that apart from hating what others have which in your world should no doubt be split up and divided amongst your fellow Brothers.
I bet that you also despise employers as ultimately it is because in many instances they hold the upper hand.
I am glad that we do not live in a world that you would like to see us all live in, you should take a little trip to Russia....you would feel very much at home there my friend. :twisted:
I ma mortifies to be honest that in 21st century Britain, there are still people like yourself who hold those lopsided views.
You must have been a great FOC.

2 Aug 2010

Quote by Bluefish2009
One thing that does stand out in your post, Is the meadia free to report what they wish and with the slant they wish, I ask as I do not know?

That is what the press council is there for Blue...apparently.
Of course there are also slander laws for serious issues of bad reporting, and newspapers have been sued many times in the past.
As for a slant on their news, depends who is doing the reading I suppose.
As you have seen on this little forum, people have completely different views on many things.
It is one persons perception on what is news, and another persons evil.
Hope that sort of answers your question.

2 Aug 2010

Quote by kentswingers777
Their position gives them power that they have not earned and do not deserve and they abuse it.....they are answerable to no-one but themselves,they cannot be deselected they are not elected and yet they wield their influence on all political parties to dictate policy to the benefit of no-one but themselves....if there is such a thing as evil they are the face of it.
As I mentioned elsewhere it is a fool or a masochist who does not object to being buggered by steely dan unlubricated..a slave asks if he's pleasing his master....
I am none of the above

Do you not know how that above comment sounds?
That comment has nothing to do with a Socialistic outlook, but purely a jealous and twisted view on people who have lots.
There was no doubt a time when Murdoch had nothing or very little, yet has built up an empire, which is what people like you despise. I cannot see any reason for that apart from hating what others have which in your world should no doubt be split up and divided amongst your fellow Brothers.
I bet that you also despise employers as ultimately it is because in many instances they hold the upper hand.
I am glad that we do not live in a world that you would like to see us all live in, you should take a little trip to Russia....you would feel very much at home there my friend. :twisted:
I ma mortifies to be honest that in 21st century Britain, there are still people like yourself who hold those lopsided views.
You must have been a great FOC.
Given that Rupert Murdoch inherited his newspaper business from his father, do you know how stupid that post makes you look?

2 Aug 2010

Quote by awayman
Given that Rupert Murdoch inherited his newspaper business from his father, do you know how stupid that post makes you look?

I am fully aware that he inherited his Fathers business....News Limited btw.
It is what he did after that which is remarkable.
Do you not think with the wonders of the internet,I have not looked at what he owns and how he acquired it?
Jeeze............

2 Aug 2010

Quote by kentswingers777
Given that Rupert Murdoch inherited his newspaper business from his father, do you know how stupid that post makes you look?

I am fully aware that he inherited his Fathers business....News Limited btw.
It is what he did after that which is remarkable.
Do you not think with the wonders of the internet,I have not looked at what he owns and how he acquired it?
Jeeze............
So when precisely did he have nothing or very little? He was a privileged wealthy man who inherited his business - he may like to pretend he's a self made man but actually he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth...

2 Aug 2010

No point trying to discuss anything with you, as your judgments are clouded and your mind made up....another Murdoch hater for exactly the same reason as I have already given to another member.
A hater of anyone with any privilege, it is not good to hold such grudges ya know. wink

it can eat away at ya.:idea:

2 Aug 2010

Again the point is missed.....here....."they abuse it"
You may well be happy with unelected foreigners deciding government policy, I'm not.
"a slave asks if he's pleasing his master".....well are you?

2 Aug 2010

A slave? Master?
Your going to too many BDSM clubs. lol

2 Aug 2010

Quote by awayman
Given that Rupert Murdoch inherited his newspaper business from his father, do you know how stupid that post makes you look?

I am fully aware that he inherited his Fathers business....News Limited btw.
It is what he did after that which is remarkable.
Do you not think with the wonders of the internet,I have not looked at what he owns and how he acquired it?
Jeeze............
So when precisely did he have nothing or very little? He was a privileged wealthy man who inherited his business - he may like to pretend he's a self made man but actually he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth...
But that was just his good/bad fotune
I was born with a wooden fork in my mouth, (made for eating fish and chips in the bag) and am probably far happier because of it. His wealth bother me not

2 Aug 2010

Quote by Bluefish2009
His wealth bother me not

But that is the whole point Blue....it bothers many.