Politico-media complex: Difference between revisions
Line 156: | Line 156: | ||
===Discussion forums=== |
===Discussion forums=== |
||
⚫ | [[Blogging]] is a type of website, usually maintained by an individual with regular entries of commentary, descriptions of events, or other material such as graphics or video. Entries are commonly displayed in reverse-chronological order. Blogging started to become popular at the start of the millennium, and was used mostly by highly educated, highly paid, males. Around 2004 blogging became more main stream and was typically used for political interaction. Many [[political campaigns]] use this as a stake in monitoring blogs talks and actively using blogs to spread information about their candidate.<ref> Tremayne, Mark. Blogging, Citizenship, and the future of media. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis Group, LLC. 2007.http://books.google.com/books?id=a6zPnOn9i9oC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Blogging,+Citizenship,+and+the+future+of+media#v=onepage&q=&f=false</ref> |
||
The internet sets up an area where people can voice their opinions and discuss political issues in an anonymous way. Some discussion forums are groups or organizations set up for a specific purpose about one issue or person in politics. |
The internet sets up an area where people can voice their opinions and discuss political issues in an anonymous way. Some discussion forums are groups or organizations set up for a specific purpose about one issue or person in politics. |
||
Some problems with discussion forums are the lack of personal contact, so there are people who do not take responsibility for posts. Many times online discussions lead to name calling and rude comments. Another issue of online discussion forums is the lack of an opposite view since many websites attract like minded individuals. |
Some problems with discussion forums are the lack of personal contact, so there are people who do not take responsibility for posts. Many times online discussions lead to name calling and rude comments. Another issue of online discussion forums is the lack of an opposite view since many websites attract like minded individuals. |
||
⚫ | [[Blogging]] is a type of website, usually maintained by an individual with regular entries of commentary, descriptions of events, or other material such as graphics or video. Entries are commonly displayed in reverse-chronological order. Blogging started to become popular at the start of the millennium, and was used mostly by highly educated, highly paid, males. Around 2004 blogging became more main stream and was typically used for political interaction. Many [[political campaigns]] use this as a stake in monitoring blogs talks and actively using blogs to spread information about their candidate.<ref> Tremayne, Mark. Blogging, Citizenship, and the future of media. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis Group, LLC. 2007.http://books.google.com/books?id=a6zPnOn9i9oC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Blogging,+Citizenship,+and+the+future+of+media#v=onepage&q=&f=false</ref> |
||
==References== |
==References== |
Revision as of 01:12, 14 November 2009
While the term politico-media complex (PMC) has not yet been officially defined in any dictionaries, a working definition can be derived from its use in contemporary political discourse. The term has come to refer to a close and symbiotic relationship between a state's political classes, particularly any ruling class, its media industry, and any interactions with or dependencies upon an analogous interest group, such as the so-called military-industrial complex (MIC).
As a pejorative term, PMC refers to a form of institutionalized collusion primarily between mainstream media (MSM) news distribution organizations and the current government under which they labor. Critics have pointed out such a relationship may have an adverse effect on democracy and be used to distort public opinion.[1][2]
National print media
Template:Wikify is deprecated. Please use a more specific cleanup template as listed in the documentation. |
The West
Newspapers and magazines are in decline in the Western world. Print media has been going out of style. For reasons of expense, and declining audience interest, print press has taken a major hit. Today a little more than half of Americans read a newspaper every day.[3] An exception to the hit taken by newspapers in the United States is the national papers. National newspapers have been doing well in the last twenty years.[4]
Newspapers and magazines do have a back and forth between readers and journalists. Most studies show that the print media are more likely to reinforce existing political attitudes of the masses than change them.[5] This makes it seem like print news is a mouthpiece for citizens, rather than a tool to oppress them. Of course, the media can only be a reflection of the masses if the masses are allowed to express their views. For this, freedom of the press is necessary.
“It is disturbing to see European democracies such as France, Italy and Slovakia fall steadily in the rankings year after year,” Julliard said. “Europe should be setting an example as regards civil liberties. How can you condemn human rights violations abroad if you do not behave irreproachably at home? The Obama effect, which has enabled the United States to recover 16 places in the index, is not enough to reassure us."[6]
Asia
China has claimed that Western freedom of press is illusory because it is controlled by a small wealthy minority. Although, Reporters Without Borders ranks China's press situation as "very serious", the worst ranking on their five-point scale.[7] The Chinese government has the legal authority to censor just about anything, despite their claims that the Communist party has the most freedom of press, since there is no wealthy minority to control it.[8]
The Middle East and North Africa
Middle Eastern print media is mainly paid for by private funders, either a specific family or specific government party. These newspapers and magazines are rather obvious in their political ties, and display the politico-media complex nicely.
Israel has experienced a media control crackdown as the government censors the military action coverage.
According to Reporters Without Boarders for 2009, Eritrea in Northern Africa is the worst ranked country for journalism freedom.[9]
Global print media
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference, and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers".[10]
Most of the International papers present in the world today are national papers re-edited for a wider audience.
Struggles
Print media has struggled with the rising cost of producing and distributing paper and ink, and the increasing popularity of online news sources. For most advertisers, online ads are cheaper and allow for a better tailored audience.
Newspapers and magazines have been struggling not only with financial issues, but also with loosing their reader’s trust. Surveys have found that people tend to trust newspapers less than other news mediums because they believe commercial issues motivate journalists. Most people believe their local and national news television stations more than their local and national newspapers. The only news medium that people trust less than newspapers is print magazines. This accounts for some of decline in readership in both newspapers and magazines, for people won’t read what they don’t believe.[11]
However, although print media is struggling in the West, newspapers and magazines in second and third world countries are doing well.[12] For these countries that do not have ready access to the Internet or television, newspapers and magazines are the only way to get the news.
Radio
History of Political Radio
The early American radio industry was composed of commercial shipping companies that used radio for navigation, and amateur radio enthusiasts, who built radios at home. [13] This mixture of industry and community went unregulated until the Radio Act of 1912, which required all ships to use radio communication and keep a constant radio watch, amateur users to be licensed, and began regulating the use of wavelengths for radio transmissions. [14] This act established precedent for all other radio legislation, including the Radio Act of 1927, which established the Federal Radio Commission and added further regulation to radio users, both commercial and amateur. [15] Government regulation increased again with the American entrance into World War I, when President Woodrow Wilson ordered naval control of all radio stations, and ordered that amateurs cease all radio activity. Jonathan Reed Winkler, a noted WWI historian, says “It was only during World War I that the United States first came to comprehend how a strategic communications network-the collection of submarine telegraph cables, and long-distance radio stations used by a nation for diplomatic, commercial and military purposes- was vital to the global political and economic interests of a great power in the modern world.”[16] After World War I radio was introduced to broader civilian audiences when Westinghouse released the Aeriola Jr. in 1919, and the Radio Corporation of America (RCA) released the Radiola in 1920. The Aeriola Jr. and Radiola brought radio into the homes of thousands of Americans. Amateur ham radio enthusiasts had been transmitting mostly in morse code, but with the advances in radio technology soon voice transmissions, mostly music and educational broadcasts became popular. By 1919 the oldest licensed American radio station, KDKA, from Pittsburgh, PA began broadcasting regular music shows.[17] Coverage of politics quickly caught on across the countries, as stations began covering elections, and reporting news of government actions. The close relationship between politics and radio was finalized in 1924 when the Republican and Democratic National Conventions were covered, and candidates made eve of election speeches, the first instance of radio broadcasting that was meant to affect the American political process.[18]
The close relationship between government and the radio would only deepen as the years passed. The numbers of radio users exploded, by 1935 about 2 in 3 American homes owned a radio.[19] Politicians quickly learned to reach these huge audiences. Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Fireside Chats are an excellent example of the politico-media complex. In his series of informal broadcasts from 1933 to 1944, Roosevelt developed a comforting rapport with the American public.[20]. The Fireside Chats enabled the President to communicate directly to the public through on of the most popular media outlets of the time. Politicians would continue to use the radio in World War II, in which the radio was used primarily for news transmissions and the spread of propaganda. One example of radio propaganda and the politico-media complex are Iva Toguri D'Aquino, Ruth Hayakawa, June Suyamawho, and Myrtle Lipton collectively known as Tokyo Rose. These women hosted anti-American programming intended to lower American soldiers' morale and illustrate the use of the politico-media complex's ability to negatively alter public mindset.[21]
Modern Political Radio
The Golden Age of Radio may have only lasted from 1935-1950, yet radio is still an active medium in the politico-media complex. Today there is extensive radio programming on politics. One notable example is the Rush Limbaugh Show which broadcasts the political commentary of Rush Limbaugh, referred to by listeners as "America's Truth Detector," the "Doctor of Democracy," and the "Most Dangerous Man in America."[22] The Rush Limbaugh Show has hosted numerous politicians, illustrating that politicians still use the radio to affect public opinion and the political process. The Air America Media company, provides progressive political commentary and news coverage and is described as "most recognized progressive talk radio network, providing an independent and unfiltered voice to a grateful listening nation." [23] Air America programs such as The Rachel Maddow Show, The Lionel Show, and Live in Washington with Jack Rice discuss recordings of politicians, host politicians as live guests, and act as a connection between the political classes and the media.[24] [25][26]
Film
It is difficult to find a film that does not involve politics in some way and, as a form of expression that can be individual or institutional, paid for, censored, or influenced by governments to varying degrees in different countries, this section only serves to provide an overview and a few specific examples of the complex relationship between film and politics for its consideration in the network of forms of media in the politico-media complex.
National Cinema
One way of film's most powerful political and sociological forms is national cinema, for which there are entire books for individual countries and varying definitions. Film can represent society, a country, how they are, should, or should not be. In a way, it is a cultural gate-keeper that can influence the ideologies and behavior of citizens. As a form of popular entertainment and thus provides a political group or a government with a powerful and dangerously imperceptible means of maintaining control and/or favor of its citizens, but also provides non-governmental groups with the power to affect change, galvanize the masses (where such films are free to be produced and screened.) Nations and ideological groups can construct and reinforce their collective identities through film, as well as the identities of foreigners.
Cultural Politics
Ulf Hedetoft has observed that "In the real world of politics and influence, certain nationalisms, cultures, ideas and interpretations are more transnationally powerful, assertive and successful than others. Where the less influential ones are not necessarily less self-congratulatory, they are certainly more inward-looking and always carry the label of national specificity."[27] He goes on, however, to say that these more transnationally powerful films actually become de-nationalized as a result of its "national-cultural currency" more widely and easily dispersed, mixing with other cultures, becoming either a "positive admixture" to other countries' cultures and identities or a "model for emulation."[28] He compares national cinema that undergoes such processes to English becoming a global lingua franca: the cultural sharing that results is hegemonic and the globalizing process is non-symmetrical.[29]
Propaganda
Propaganda is a way that politics can represented in film. Leif Furhammar and Folke Isaksson credit Russian producers Sergei Eisenstein and Vsevolod Pudovkin with the birth of propaganda aesthetics, for which the underlying assupmtion was that by manipulating cinematic images representing reality, they could manipulate spectators' concepts of reality.[30] Documentaries can even be an even more effective form of propaganda than other genre films because the form of representation claims to mirror reality, making the manipulation of an audience that much more obscured [31]
Even just 30 years after Dachau and Auschwitz, the thinly disguised fascist propaganda Italian film The Night Porter (1974) sought to legitimize the Nazis' genocide, while glorifying sadism, brutality, and machismo. [32] What amazes Henry Giroux, as he explains in "Breaking into the Movies," is that such blatant ideological messages were ignored by critics and the general public. That society may be incapable of testing the present against the past has implications for post-industrial oppression in the West and the strategies for resisting it. Despite the writings of Antonio Gramsci, Herbert Marcuse, and Paulo Freire, the majority of Americans (at least) do not recognize how important "class hegemony" (cultural domination) is in nations where populations are kept obedient through ideological means. [33] He argues, "We are not only victims in the political and material sense, but are also tied emotionally and intellectually to the prevailing ruling-class norms and values." [34]
Anti-politics in Film
Overtly political films have never been popular in the U.S. despite the strong patriotism and nationalism of Americans.[35] Besides Frank Capra, no other major American film-maker has seriously presented central themes of citizenship, participation, and responsibility in civic life. Lindholm and Hall, in "Frank Capra Meets John Doe," connect the failure of his project to "develop a positive American cinematic vocabulary for political action" with what they argue are "fundamental contradictions in American national identity." [36] After a period of depression, Capra resolved to inspire Americans "by reaffirming and updating national myths in his films."[37]
Capra's films from that point on were characterized by the same basic formula according to which the fundamental American values of fairness and honesty are challenged by the corruption and cruelty of the city and government. During his presidential campaign Ronald Reagan later extensively quoted the speech made by Mr. Deeds in Mr. Deeds Goes to Town (1936) when he makes a passionate speech that wins everyone over at the trial in which he is accused of insanity. He calls for "charity and individual goodness -- combined with a distaste for the complexities of political life." [38] His next film Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939) reinforced these values as well as the American faith in the legal system the integrity and decency of the everyman versus the power and the crookedness of special interest groups, hence constructing a myth of the American everyman hero who is able to defeat corporate evil. [39] John Doe (1941), which ads went to great pains to market as the true everyman representative of the American public conformed again to Capra's formula, but without the strong family roots and initially amoral, a reflection on America's ambivalence toward social life. [40] The ideal of the power of individualism and the fluidity of social mobility abound. Capra promotes the free man's ability to take up the responsibilities and obligations that come with a social conscience the community and state. After Joe realizes his need for others, he discovers and attempts to expose a fascist bidder for presidency planning to take advantage of his club support, but he fails in the midst of a violent mob with the depressing conclusion that the American public is a credulous crowd susceptible to manipulation until the John Doe club members come begging his forgiveness and convince him to return to lead them.[citation needed]
The unsuccessful ending discouraged any more political films for Capra and no films of merit after It's a Wonderful Life and he said in old age that all American film-makers should forget politics if they don't want to cut themselves in half. [41] Alexis de Tocqueville elaborates on what Capra apparently assumed as well: "[T]he egalitarian individualist is inevitably disconnected from the world of society and politics" and the "major theme of American social thought...is how to relate the isolated individual to the larger social whole." [42] Tocqueville, however, argued that without some kind of religious faith, the institutions responsible for instilling civic virtue in citizens, as Capra was attempting to do through the media of film, would be ultimately ineffective.[citation needed]
Lindholm and Hall conclude with the observation that "the problems that defeated Capra have also undercut later attempts by American film-makers to portray the complex relationship between individualism and citizenship in the United States" and say that Hollywood has instead adopted the paranoia of politics that Capra had tried to overcome. [43] Consequently, political films in the U.S. have followed a trend of focusing on the flawed character of leaders, such as Citizen Kane (1940) and Nixon (1995), or otherwise show the corruption of power, such as in The Candidate (1972) and Primary Colors (1998). Other films like A Face in a Crowd (1957) and All the King's Men (1949) follow John Doe's warning. JFK (1991) and The Manchurian Candidate (1962), on the other hand, are based on the premise that democracy is an illusion and Americans are the ignorant pawns of various conspiracies.[citation needed]
The Depoliticizing Effect of Cinema
"...the complexity and dynamics of class struggle, have been treated by mass culture in terms that both depoliticize and flatten the contradictions inherent in such relationships. In other words, the concept of class has been reduced to predictable formulas that represent forms of ideological shorthand. Needless to say, Hollywood has played no small role in dealing with class-based issues in such a way as to strip them of any critical social meaning." [44]
"It might be more fruitful to view Hollywood ideology less as a result of conscious lies than as a worldview so closely related to the dominant structures of production that the relationship is not a conscious matter of reflection." [45] Giroux argues that prevailing ideology is so powerful and ubiquitous that it is going unquestioned by those in power, although he also admits that there are some exceptions. One of these exceptions is Norma Rae (1979), a film that presents a truer representation of the complexities and politics of the working-class struggle and culture at the level of everyday life.[citation needed]
Actors turned politicians
- For a more thorough list of actor-politicians, refer to List of actor-politicians.
Television
Politics and the media: the role of television
I. Television and politics
- Lang, Kurt and Gladys Engel. “Television and Politics.”
II. The Role of Television in the American Presidential Elections
- Heard, Alexander and Nelson, Michael. “Presidential Selection.”
- "Presidential election campaigns center on television."[46]
- When news programs do not catch the public's eey, televised political advertising does."[46]
- "Television has transformed the candidates' campaigns."[47]
- In the early 1960s, however, network television increased its newscasts to the present thirty-minute format and greatly expanded its news-gathering capacity. Presidential candidates then had a medium tailored to their needs. Because the network audience was national, network news became the center of journalistic coverage of national politics -- particularly presidential politics."[48]
- "The way Ameriacns choose their presidents has been studied exhaustively."[49]
- "Innovations in the mass media have always affected political processes, but never moe so than recently."[50]
- McCombs, Maxwell E. and Shaw, Donald L. "The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media."
- "In choosing and displaying news, editors, newsroom staff, and broadcasters play an important part in shaping political reality. Readers learn not only about a given issue, but also how much importance to attach to that issue from the amount of information in a news story and its position. In reflecting what candidates are saying during a campaign, the mass media may well determine the important issues—that is, the media may set the "agenda" of the campaign."[51]
- "The power of the news media to set a nation’s agenda, to focus public attention on a few key public issues, is an immense and well-documented influence. Not only do people acquire factual information about public affairs from the news media, readers and viewers also learn how much importance to attach to a topic on the basis of the emphasis placed on it in the news. Newspapers provide a host of cues about the salience of the topics in the daily news – lead story on page one, other front page display, large headlines, etc. Television news also offers numerous cues about salience – the opening story on the newscast, length of time devoted to the story, etc. These cues repeated day after day effectively communicate the importance of each topic. In other words, the news media can set the agenda for the public’s attention to that small group of issues around which public opinion forms."[52]
- "In choosing and displaying news, editors, newsroom staff, and broadcasters play an important part in shaping political reality. Readers learn not only about a given issue, but also how much importance to attach to that issue from the amount of information in a news story and its position. In re¬flecting what candidates are saying during a campaign, the mass media may well determine the important issues—that is, the media may set the "agenda" of the campaign."[53]
- Shenkan, Rick. “Just How Stupid Are We?: Facing the Truth About the American Voter.”
- "...as American voters have gained politcal power in the last 50 years, they have become increasingly ignorant of politics and world affairs - and dangerously susceptible to manipulation."[54]
- "...he illustrates how politicians have repeatedly misled voters and analyzes the dumbing down of American politics via marketing, spin machines, and misinformation."[55]
- "“Americans are getting what little information they have about the candidates from 30-second commercials, and that's insufficient as a basis for deciding how you're going to vote and what you think about our politics. In the past, people got most of their information from newspapers—that was a much better source.” [56]
- “In a competitive capitalistic society like ours, where there is a great emphasis on entertainment, people are not inclined to sit down and study a newspaper and figure out what's actually going on in politics. That leads to very superficial politics.”[57]
- “The book argues that although the American government has gained global political power since the late 20th century, American voters have become increasingly ignorant of politics and world affairs, and are dangerously susceptible to political manipulation.”[58]
III. Political Influence on Religion via Television
- Rajagopal, Arvind. “Politics After Television: Religious Nationalism and the Reshaping of the Public in India.”
- “In this book, Arvind Rajagopal examines the many articulations of Hindu nationalism during the late 1980s and 1990s in India. In particular, he analyzes the hegemonic role of the Ram Janmabhumi (Birthplace of Ram) movement in shaping discourses about national and cultural identities through the 1990s to the present.”[59]
- “ His study is a very substantial analysis of contemporary Indian public culture and the role of the media in the discursive constructions of national, cultural, class, and regional identity. The author's careful study of the Ram project as it was played out in the English and Hindi language print media, even as it found its initial impetus on national television, points to the importance of conducting culturally specific studies.”[60]
- “… analyses of media and public cultures in contemporary India to emerge in recent times.”[61]
- “… to explore the ways in which a particular media text is deployed within a specific sociohistorical context. It is the meanings that emerge at the site of interaction between texts, contexts, and historical actors that speak more clearly to the role of media in contemporary society.”[62]
- “Given Rajagopal's argument that the national telecast of the Hindu religious epic Ramayan during the late 1980s prepared much of the ideological ground for the launch of the Ram Janmabhumi movement, one finds the title rather provocative. Defending his title, Rajagopal states, "Television profoundly changes the context of politics. But to treat it thereafter as center and source point of influence is misleading ... There is an institutional break between production and reception, and between the dispersed regions of message interpretation and the indirect modes of its use. Accordingly, no law-like patterns of influence are likely to be discerned ... Television's influence, has then, to be presumed rather than discovered, contra media effects research, as the backdrop, stage, and vehicle of social interaction" (24).”[63]
- “… investigate the cultural and political economy of television in contemporary India.”[64]
- “Rajagopal's discussion of television revolves around the industrial and cultural politics of the serialized epic Ramayan. The serial, which generated unprecedented viewership, was based on the epic story of the Hindu god Ram and aired on Doordarshan, India's state-run television…”[65]
- “Rajagopal makes a very interesting point about the politics of the serial's broadcast on narional television. Given India's ideal of a secular government, the broadcast, sponsored by the ruling Congress government, represented a move away from nonpartisan government institutions. The author argues that the Congress exhibited media naivete when it assumed that the mere sponsorship of the epic would aid its electoral future by bringing in the majority Hindu vote. Instead it was the electorally weak Hindu nationalist political body, the Bharariya Janata Party (BJP), that cashed in on the serial's popularity, and it did so by steering clear of the simplistic media effects framework that clearly did not work for the Congress. The BJP articulated a complex relationship between the televised Hindu epic and its own Hindu nationalist beliefs; it mobilized the public around the symbol of Ram, the lead figure of the serial, but strategically reworked the symbol via the Ram Janmabhumi movement to articulate cultural authenticity, national belonging, and a renewed sense of national purpose and direction. Articulating the temple restoration project within its electoral promise, the BJP, not surprisingly, went on to form the national government in the next general elections.”[66]
- “They created a public voice for it by skillfully using both the media and the market; for example, they invoked images from the televised Ramayan at public rallies and "retailed" Hindu identity by creating commodities such as stickers, buttons, and audio tapes around the key figure of Ram. By engineering spectacular public events around the temple issue, the Hindu nationalists created a new public agenda for a majority of the citizens.”[67]
- “Central to that success was the strategic use of media…In the chapter titled "Prime-Time Religion" Rajagopal argues that the televised epic negotiated the tension between the past and the present at many levels. One could see it, for example, in the reworking of the epic story to fit the conventions of commercial television.”[68]
- “… the televised epic recast the story in a contemporary vein. Moreover, the suggestion of an ideal Hindu society carried particular resonance for the contemporary social context. Furthermore, laced by twenty minutes of advertising before and after, the serial skillfully reconstructed the past through technologies of the present.”[69]
- “…in particular, he maps out the ways in which television in postcolonial India operated as a symbol of modernity, "a new mode of communication, and a certain kind of thinginess, a desirable commodity pointing to other desirable commodities" (123).”[70]
- “The author states, "Although television created a context for collective awareness, the footprint of the medium was large at this time (1987-91), with only one government-run channel available across much of the country. The speed and sensitivity with which television could respond to signals from popular audiences was severely limited for these reasons; in effect, electronic programming did not go much beyond the face of Hindu tele-epics during this period" (170).”[71]
IV. Television and Politics Around the World
- Abu-Lughod, Lila. “Dramas of Nationhood: The Politics of Television in Egypt.”
- "...a fantastic cultural form that binds together the Egyptian nation - television serials. These melodramatic programs - like soap operas but more closely tied to political and social issues than their Western counterparts. . .the shifting politics of these serials and the way their contents both reflect and seek to direct the changing course of Islam, gender relations, and everyay life in this Middle Eastern nation."[72]
- "...makes a case for the importance of studying television to answer larger questions about culture, power, and modern self-fashionings. Abu-Lughod explores the elements of developmentalist ideology and the visions of national progress that once dominated Egyptian television - now experiencing a crisis. She discusses the braodcasts...the depictions of authentic national culture, to the debates inflamed by their deliberate strategies for combating religious extremism."[73]
- Hamamoto, Darrell Y. “Monitored Peril: Asian Americans and the Politics of TV Representation.”
- Semetko, Holli A. and Valenburg, Patti M. “Framing European Politics: A content Analysis of Press and Television News.”
- “Our results showed that, overall, the attribution of responsibility frame was most commonly used in the news…”[74]
- Framing analysis shares with agenda-setting research a focus on the relationship between public policy issues in the news and the public perceptions of these issues. However, framing analysis "expands beyond agenda-setting research into what people talk or think about by examining how they think and talk about issues in thenews" ( Pan & Kosicki, 1993 , p. 70, emphasis in the original).”[75]
- “News frames are "concep¬tual tools which media and individuals rely on to convey, interpret and evaluate information" (Neuman et al., 1992 , p. 60). They set the parameters "in which citizens discuss public events" (Tuchman, 1978, p. IV). They are "persistent selec¬tion, emphasis, and exclusion" ( Gitlin, 1980 , p. 7). Framing is selecting "someaspects of a perceived reality" to enhance their salience "in such a way as topromote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation,and/or treatment recommendation" ( Entman, 1993 , p. 53). Frames are to helpaudiences "locate, perceive, identify, and label" the flow of information aroundthem (Goffman, 1974, p. 21) and to "narrow the available political alternatives"(Tuchman, 1978, p. 156).”[76]
- “…a framing effect is "one in which salient attributes of a message (its organization, selection of content, or thematic structure) render particular thoughts applicable, resulting in their activation and use in evaluations" ( Price et al., 1997, p. 486). Experiments with question wording, for example, show that the framing of choices can have profound consequences for respondents' perception of risk ( Kahneman, 1984; Kahneman & Tversky, 1982). Frames have also been shown to shape public perceptions of political issues or institutions.”[77]
V. Conclusion
Internet
Template:Wikify is deprecated. Please use a more specific cleanup template as listed in the documentation. |
The internet's impact on political media
The internet has given the world a tool for education, communication, and negotiation in political information and political roles. The use of the internet has greatly increasing giving more communication and education to individuals and organizations. The increase in usage can be compared to the boom of the television and its impact on politics through the media. The internet also opens up a world commentary and criticism which in turn allows for new and better ideas many people.[78] The internet gives multidirectional communication, which allows people to stay in connection with organizations or people associated with politics a little easier.[79] There are many controversies of the politico-media complex being short bits of information or biased information leading to public cynicism toward the media.[78] Then there is also a positive spin on politics and the media in that; it gives us the ability to uses multiple forms of deliberation and decision making structures. The advancements of the internet’s impact on politics are outstanding. The internet has more current information since it is being constantly updated. Another advancement is the ability to have all information in one place, like voting records, periodicals, press releases, opinion polls, policy statements, speeches, etc. This information was all in a library at one time, and it would take longer to look information up. Political Information available on the internet covers every major activity of American politics.[78]
The boom of e-mail hit the internet in the mid 1990s as a way to keep in touch with family and friends. Different governments got a hold of this technology, and in 1993 Congress and the White House were using this as communication for the general public. During the Clinton administration a director for e-mail and electronic publishing was appointed. By the summer of 1993, the White House was receiving 800 e-mails per day. In order to deal with the influx of e-mail a more sophisticated system was put in. When an e-mail is sent there is a standard form and is easily categorized. In a six month period, at one point, there were half a million e-mails sent to the president and vice president.[80]
The internet and elections
The internet had given people a great resource for information about elections like: candidates, issues, and a place to give and receive opinions and ideas about elections. Since the use of the internet increases, so do the relationship with candidates and their issues. The ability of the candidates to reach as many people as they can through the internet is becoming a terrific resource in their campaigns. The presidential campaign in 1996 between President Bill Clinton and Robert Dole was one of the first campaigns to utilize the Internet on a national level.[78]
With so many campaigns using the Internet it raises a significant amount of money in a shorter period of time then with any other method. The web sites are set up like advertising sites. There are links to click on to watch ads, information and background on the candidate, photos from the campaign trail, schedules, donation links, etc. E-mail gives a great low-cost way of connecting with the campaign trail and voters.[78]
In this last Presidential election of Barack Obama verses John McCain, the internet was extensively utilized by both candidates. Facebook, an internet social network, was used heavily to give people the ability to support their views and share information with their friends. Both sent out messages daily to promote themselves and the issues at hand, for leverage against the other candidate.
Discussion forums
Blogging is a type of website, usually maintained by an individual with regular entries of commentary, descriptions of events, or other material such as graphics or video. Entries are commonly displayed in reverse-chronological order. Blogging started to become popular at the start of the millennium, and was used mostly by highly educated, highly paid, males. Around 2004 blogging became more main stream and was typically used for political interaction. Many political campaigns use this as a stake in monitoring blogs talks and actively using blogs to spread information about their candidate.[81]
The internet sets up an area where people can voice their opinions and discuss political issues in an anonymous way. Some discussion forums are groups or organizations set up for a specific purpose about one issue or person in politics.
Some problems with discussion forums are the lack of personal contact, so there are people who do not take responsibility for posts. Many times online discussions lead to name calling and rude comments. Another issue of online discussion forums is the lack of an opposite view since many websites attract like minded individuals.
References
- ^ Rawnsley, Andrew (May 13, 2001). "Comment: INSIDE POLITICS: A conspiracy that threatens democracy: With politicians and the media feeding each other's cynicism, it's no wonder people say they are bored. But you give up your vote at your peril". The Observer. Guardian Newspapers, Limited. p. 29. Retrieved 2007-07-16.
The politico-media complex has locked itself into a cycle where politicians and journalists feed each other's negativity.
- ^ Jenkins, Simon (September 8, 2006). "Comment & Debate: The weekend's 9/11 horror-fest will do Osama bin Laden's work for him: This repetitious publicity glorifies terrorism as a weapon of war, scaring us far more than the original explosions did". The Guardian. Guardian Newspapers, Limited. p. 36. Retrieved 2007-07-17.
This response has become 24-hour, seven-day-a-week amplification by the new politico-media complex, especially shrill where the dead are white people.
- ^ http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2004/narrative_newspapers_audience.asp?cat=3&media=2
- ^ Editor and Publisher Yearbook Online data, 2003, www.editorandpublisher.com.
- ^ Byerly, Caroline. Ross, Karen. “Women and media: international perspectives”. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2004.
- ^ http://www.rsf.org/en-classement1003-2009.html
- ^ "THE NEWS BY COUNTRY". Reporters Without Borders. Retrieved 25 August 2006
- ^ "history of publishing." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 02 Nov. 2009
- ^ http://www.rsf.org/en-classement1003-2009.html
- ^ http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/
- ^ http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2004/narrative_newspapers_publicattitudes.asp?cat=7&media=2
- ^ http://www.zawya.com/story.cfm/sidDS261009_dsart58/Struggling%20Papers
- ^ Craig, Douglas B. Fireside Politics: Radio and Political Culture in the United States. pg 26. The Johns Hopkins University Press. 2000.
- ^ An Act to Regulate Radio Communication, August 13, 1912.
- ^ Public Law No. 632, February 23, 1927, 69th Congress. An Act for the regulation of radio communications, and for other purposes.
- ^ Winkler, Jonathan Reed. Nexus: Strategic Communications and American Security in World War I. pg. 2. Harvard University Press. 2008.
- ^ Bliss, Edward. Now the News: the Story of Broadcast Journalism. pg. 10. Columbia University Press. 1991.
- ^ Bliss, Edward. Now the News: the Story of Broadcast Journalism. pg. 18. Columbia University Press. 1991.
- ^ Schoenherr, Steven E. "Golden Age of Radio,1935-1950" http://history.sandiego.edu/gen/recording/radio2.html
- ^ "Treasures of American History: The Great Depression and World War II." National Museum of American History. Kenneth E. Behring Center. Smithsonian Institute. http://americanhistory.si.edu/exhibitions/small_exhibition.cfm?key=1267&exkey=143&pagekey=246
- ^ "Famous Cases: Iva Toguri d'Aquino and 'Tokyo Rose.'" The Federal Bureau of Investigation. http://www.fbi.gov/libref/historic/famcases/rose/rose.htm
- ^ "About the Rush Limbaugh Show." RushLimbaugh.com. Premier Radio Networks. http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/about_the_show.guest.html
- ^ "About Air America." http://AirAmerica.com/about/
- ^ "About the Rachel Maddow Show" http://airamerica.com/therachelmaddowshow/about/
- ^ "About the Lionel Show" http://airamerica.com/lionel/about/
- ^ "About Live in Washington with Jack Rice" http://airamerica.com/liveinmwashingtonwithjackrice/about/
- ^ Hedetoft, Ulf. Cinema and Nation. Eds. Mette Hjort and Scott Mackenzie. New York: Routledge, 2000. p. 280
- ^ Hedetoft, Ulf. Cinema and Nation. Eds. Mette Hjort and Scott Mackenzie. New York: Routledge, 2000. p. 280
- ^ Hedetoft, Ulf. Cinema and Nation. Eds. Mette Hjort and Scott Mackenzie. New York: Routledge, 2000. p. 280
- ^ Furhammar, Leif, and Folke Isaksson. Politics and Film. Trans. Kersti French. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1968. p. 152.
- ^ Furhammar, Leif, and Folke Isaksson. Politics and Film. Trans. Kersti French. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1968. p. 152.
- ^ Giroux, Henry A. Breaking in to the Movies: Film and the Culture of Politics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publisers, 2002. p. 29
- ^ Giroux, Henry A. Breaking in to the Movies: Film and the Culture of Politics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publisers, 2002. p. 31
- ^ Giroux, Henry A. Breaking in to the Movies: Film and the Culture of Politics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publisers, 2002. p. 31
- ^ Lindholm, Charles and John A. Hall. "Frank Capra meets John Doe: Anti-politics in American National Identity." Cinema and Nation. Eds. Mette Hjort and Scott Mackenzie. New York: Routledge, 2000. p. 32
- ^ Lindholm, Charles and John A. Hall. "Frank Capra meets John Doe: Anti-politics in American National Identity." Cinema and Nation. Eds. Mette Hjort and Scott Mackenzie. New York: Routledge, 2000. p. 32
- ^ Lindholm, Charles and John A. Hall. "Frank Capra meets John Doe: Anti-politics in American National Identity." Cinema and Nation. Eds. Mette Hjort and Scott Mackenzie. New York: Routledge, 2000. p. 33
- ^ Lindholm, Charles and John A. Hall. "Frank Capra meets John Doe: Anti-politics in American National Identity." Cinema and Nation. Eds. Mette Hjort and Scott Mackenzie. New York: Routledge, 2000. p. 34
- ^ Lindholm, Charles and John A. Hall. "Frank Capra meets John Doe: Anti-politics in American National Identity." Cinema and Nation. Eds. Mette Hjort and Scott Mackenzie. New York: Routledge, 2000. p. 34-35
- ^ Lindholm, Charles and John A. Hall. "Frank Capra meets John Doe: Anti-politics in American National Identity." Cinema and Nation. Eds. Mette Hjort and Scott Mackenzie. New York: Routledge, 2000. p. 36
- ^ Lindholm, Charles and John A. Hall. "Frank Capra meets John Doe: Anti-politics in American National Identity." Cinema and Nation. Eds. Mette Hjort and Scott Mackenzie. New York: Routledge, 2000. p. 40
- ^ Lindholm, Charles and John A. Hall. "Frank Capra meets John Doe: Anti-politics in American National Identity." Cinema and Nation. Eds. Mette Hjort and Scott Mackenzie. New York: Routledge, 2000. p. 41
- ^ Lindholm, Charles and John A. Hall. "Frank Capra meets John Doe: Anti-politics in American National Identity." Cinema and Nation. Eds. Mette Hjort and Scott Mackenzie. New York:
- ^ Giroux, Henry A. Breaking in to the Movies: Film and the Culture of Politics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publisers, 2002. p. 19
- ^ Giroux, Henry A. Breaking in to the Movies: Film and the Culture of Politics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publisers, 2002. p. 20
- ^ a b Heard, Alexander and Nelson, Michael. “Presidential Selection.” United States of America: Duke University Press, 1987.
- ^ Heard, Alexander and Nelson, Michael. “Presidential Selection.” United States of America: Duke University Press, 1987.
- ^ Heard, Alexander and Nelson, Michael. “Presidential Selection.” United States of America: Duke University Press, 1987.
- ^ Heard, Alexander and Nelson, Michael. “Presidential Selection.” United States of America: Duke University Press, 1987.
- ^ Heard, Alexander and Nelson, Michael. “Presidential Selection.” United States of America: Duke University Press, 1987.
- ^ McCombs, Maxwell E. and Shaw, Donald L. "The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media." Public Opinion Quarterly, 1972, XXXVI, 2.
- ^ McCombs, Maxwell E. and Shaw, Donald L. "The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media." Public Opinion Quarterly, 1972, XXXVI, 2.
- ^ McCombs, Maxwell E. and Shaw, Donald L. "The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media." Public Opinion Quarterly, 1972, XXXVI, 2.
- ^ Shenkman, Rick. “Just How Stupid Are We?: Facing the Truth About the American Voter.” New York, NY: Basic Books, 2009.
- ^ Shenkman, Rick. “Just How Stupid Are We?: Facing the Truth About the American Voter.” New York, NY: Basic Books, 2009.
- ^ Shenkman, Rick. “Just How Stupid Are We?: Facing the Truth About the American Voter.” New York, NY: Basic Books, 2009.
- ^ Shenkman, Rick. “Just How Stupid Are We?: Facing the Truth About the American Voter.” New York, NY: Basic Books, 2009.
- ^ Shenkman, Rick. “Just How Stupid Are We?: Facing the Truth About the American Voter.” New York, NY: Basic Books, 2009.
- ^ Rajagopal, Arvind. “Politics After Television: Religious Nationalism and the Reshaping of the Public in India.” Cambridge, United Kingdom: The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, 2001.
- ^ Rajagopal, Arvind. “Politics After Television: Religious Nationalism and the Reshaping of the Public in India.” Cambridge, United Kingdom: The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, 2001.
- ^ Rajagopal, Arvind. “Politics After Television: Religious Nationalism and the Reshaping of the Public in India.” Cambridge, United Kingdom: The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, 2001.
- ^ Rajagopal, Arvind. “Politics After Television: Religious Nationalism and the Reshaping of the Public in India.” Cambridge, United Kingdom: The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, 2001.
- ^ Rajagopal, Arvind. “Politics After Television: Religious Nationalism and the Reshaping of the Public in India.” Cambridge, United Kingdom: The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, 2001.
- ^ Rajagopal, Arvind. “Politics After Television: Religious Nationalism and the Reshaping of the Public in India.” Cambridge, United Kingdom: The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, 2001.
- ^ Rajagopal, Arvind. “Politics After Television: Religious Nationalism and the Reshaping of the Public in India.” Cambridge, United Kingdom: The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, 2001.
- ^ Rajagopal, Arvind. “Politics After Television: Religious Nationalism and the Reshaping of the Public in India.” Cambridge, United Kingdom: The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, 2001.
- ^ Rajagopal, Arvind. “Politics After Television: Religious Nationalism and the Reshaping of the Public in India.” Cambridge, United Kingdom: The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, 2001.
- ^ Rajagopal, Arvind. “Politics After Television: Religious Nationalism and the Reshaping of the Public in India.” Cambridge, United Kingdom: The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, 2001.
- ^ Rajagopal, Arvind. “Politics After Television: Religious Nationalism and the Reshaping of the Public in India.” Cambridge, United Kingdom: The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, 2001.
- ^ Rajagopal, Arvind. “Politics After Television: Religious Nationalism and the Reshaping of the Public in India.” Cambridge, United Kingdom: The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, 2001.
- ^ Rajagopal, Arvind. “Politics After Television: Religious Nationalism and the Reshaping of the Public in India.” Cambridge, United Kingdom: The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, 2001.
- ^ Abu-Lughod, Lila. “Dramas of Nationhood: The Politics of Television in Egypt.” Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press, 2005.
- ^ Abu-Lughod, Lila. “Dramas of Nationhood: The Politics of Television in Egypt.” Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press, 2005.
- ^ Semetko, Holli A. and Valenburg, Patti M. “Framing European Politics: A content Analysis of Press and Television News.” Journal of Communication, Vol. 50, 2000.
- ^ Semetko, Holli A. and Valenburg, Patti M. “Framing European Politics: A content Analysis of Press and Television News.” Journal of Communication, Vol. 50, 2000.
- ^ Semetko, Holli A. and Valenburg, Patti M. “Framing European Politics: A content Analysis of Press and Television News.” Journal of Communication, Vol. 50, 2000.
- ^ Semetko, Holli A. and Valenburg, Patti M. “Framing European Politics: A content Analysis of Press and Television News.” Journal of Communication, Vol. 50, 2000.
- ^ a b c d e Kaid, Lynda L. Handbook of Political Communication Research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers. 2004.http://books.google.com/books?id=ffqEaH6UM7UC&pg=PP1&dq=Handbook+of+Political+communication+Research#v=onepage&q=&f=false Cite error: The named reference "name" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
- ^ Shane, Peter M. Democracy online: The Prospects for Political Renewal Through the Internet. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis Group. 2004.http://books.google.com/books?id=kVeUG9I2bVwC&pg=PP1&dq=Democracy+online:+The+Prospects+for+Political+Renewal+Through+the+Internet.#v=onepage&q=&f=false
- ^ Davis, Richard and Owen, Diana M. New Media and American Politics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, Inc. 1998.http://books.google.com/books?id=f-Ka0nSKaFoC&pg=PP1&dq=New+Media+and+American+Politics#v=onepage&q=&f=false
- ^ Tremayne, Mark. Blogging, Citizenship, and the future of media. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis Group, LLC. 2007.http://books.google.com/books?id=a6zPnOn9i9oC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Blogging,+Citizenship,+and+the+future+of+media#v=onepage&q=&f=false
See also
Further reading
- Chandler, D. Positioning Of The Subject. Semiotics: The Basics. Routledge, 2007, ISBN 0-415-36375-6. pp. 186-190. (Weblink information found in 'External links.' [WFE])
- Ibid. Postructuralist Semiotics. pp. 217-221.
- Herman, E.S., Chomsky, N. Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. Vintage, 1994, ISBN 0-375-71449-9.
- Oborne, P. Part III The Capturing of the Media. The Triumph of the Political Class. Simon & Schuster, 2007 ISBN 978-0-7432-9527-7. pp. 233-293.
- Smail, D. The Language of Anxiety. Illusion and Reality: The Meaning of Anxiety. Dent, 1984 ISBN 0-094-77440-4. pp.81-98. (WFE)
External links
- A Very Special Relationship
- Blair's message for the media, Martin Kettle, Tuesday June 12, 2007. (Journalist Kettle finds outgoing Prime Minister Blair's attack on the 'ferality' of the media 'interesting.')
- David Smail's website
- How Murdoch plans to win friends and influence people, Paul Murphy, Thursday February 2, 2006. (Journalist Murphy refers to a memorandum: Project proposals and tools to communicate public affairs messages)
- Manufacturing Consent video documentary
- Revealed: Blair's talks with Murdoch on eve of war
- Semiotics: The Basics web version. For Positioning of the Subject, select Modes of Address and 'Find (on This Page)' [twice]
- The Propaganda Model: A Retrospective, Edward S. Herman, December 9, 2003
- "Trust Me, I'm Gordon - Not Tony". BBC News. 2007-06-25. Retrieved 2008-08-05., John Ware, Panorama, BBC One at 2030 GMT on Monday 25 June, 2007