Over the last few days, a number of people on social media have complained we didn't hear about the bombing in Beirut. We did, or at least some of us did. There were actually plenty of news reports about it, however, depending on the news you seek out, you may not have seen it. I want to talk about our responsibility, one that we've let slip.
Somehow we have lost our way. Somehow we decided news needed to be entertaining and we lost interest in being informed. We decided we didn't need to pay for quality news coverage. We forced the mainstream news to compete with celebrity news and clickbait articles. We dumbed ourselves down. And now we complain that world news gets hidden in small Reuters paragraphs at the back of the news section of the actual newspaper, that we neither purchase nor read.
David Carr, in the movie Page One (on the New York Times) said 'The New York Times has dozens of bureaus all over the world and people are going to toss that out and see what Facebook turns up'. A lot of people did just that. And social media feeds are tailored to us, so we aren't going to see what we aren't 'interested' in. We may not even see what's true. If that is how you get your news (and I'm ashamed to say most days it's how I get my news), then you can't complain that you don't know what's going on in the world.
I have written before that I believe it's our responsibility to demand unbiased news, and be well informed, so we can be contributing participants on this planet. That may cost us a little money. It will cost us a little time (to read all the articles).
We can not blame the media for not covering something if we don't make it financially viable for them to cover it. Good news coverage costs.
For those that haven't seen it, the opening scene of the Newsroom sums it up well (on America no longer being the greatest country in the world, and it applies to us all):
"We sure used to be. We stood up for what was right! We fought for moral reasons, we passed and struck down laws for moral reasons. We waged wars on poverty, not poor people. We sacrificed, we cared about our neighbors, we put our money where our mouths were....We aspired to intelligence; we didn't belittle it; it didn't make us feel inferior. We didn't identify ourselves by who we voted for in the last election, and we didn't scare so easy. And we were able to be all these things and do all these things because we were informed...The first step in solving any problem is recognizing there is one."
I was in Bali after the school massacre in Pakistan and the newspaper there was full of letters to the editor complaining that Muslim Governments needed to do more than publicly condemn the actions of the terrorists with mere words. My news feed at home had not even shown there had been any condemnation, and it covered little more than the horror of the attack. So who's at fault? My media source? I would say yes, as I just get emailed clickbait headlines trying to lure me in to the website.
Really though, it's me. I'm the culprit that has demanded lessor coverage. I have said 'I won't click on this global political story but I will click on this Bachelor update', and I want you to somehow find me news stories for free. I have forced a change, and it's a change for the worse.
In view of global terror, I'm now complaining about what I've created, as if I'm not somehow at fault for my ignorance.
I believe it's up to us to change this. If we don't like the coverage, we need to go back to news that funds reporters to report, to dig out the stories we need to know. We need to tailor our news stream to cover real news, not scandals and gossip. We need to make sure we are receiving broader coverage, global coverage. We need to be the adults of yesterday. We probably need to pay for it too.
We recognize the problem now, so let's solve it. No news is not necessarily good news. Not now.
Linking with #WWU and #TIK
Both the movie and series mentioned above are worth a watch (in my opinion) - available here (the links are to JBHIFI but not for any reason, that's just who I thought of - it's not a special or anything) Page One and Newsroom (there are 3 seasons)
Showing posts with label Media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Media. Show all posts
Sunday, 15 November 2015
Monday, 8 December 2014
Good for her, not for me!
I am reading Amy Poehler's Yes Please - I'm a huge fan of this talented lady and it's only making me love her more. I have a total crush on her and she grows more awesome in my estimation the more I read. This book is the perfect Christmas gift for women everywhere, as she's like Oprah but funnier. It's irrelevant if you watch her show or movies, the book contains so many words of wisdom to live by, that I've got 2 more posts lined up and I'm only 100 pages in. (I hope this plug and link to the book sale page excuses any copyright issues).
In an offhand remark, she announces the perfect response to those judgmental or loaded statements: "Good for her, not for me!". If you've switched to bottle feeding and people start shoving the stories of breast feeding struggle in your face, simply say "Good for her, not for me!". If someone is lauding the importance of stay-at-home mums on your first day back at work, smile and say "Good for her, not for me!". If someone is telling you how they need to work for their sanity, while you treasure your time at home with the kids, respond with a cheery "Good for you, not for me!" Save your arguments for the professionals - always seek medical opinions on home birth, elective cesarean, feeding, exercise, home schooling, private schooling (whatever the issue is that's giving you grief). To friends and family, respond with a "Good for her, not for me", and better yet, mean it. How they raise their kids and live their life is really no concern of ours.
We don't have to justify our decisions if we believe we are doing what is right of us (and the child) and have the medical/professional back up to ensure we are doing no harm.
More importantly, we don't need to play the game where parenting sites and women's media use click bait to make us be nasty to other women.
Next time you see it on Facebook, just scroll on past.
Next time someone comes in on the attack, smile sweetly and say "Good for her, not for me!".
Please note, this is not a post advocating any type of birth method or child rearing method over any other methods. This is a post advocating that women stop fighting with each other on these issues. (To which you can say to me, of course "Good for you, but not for me")
Linking up with #BWBR
Monday, 10 March 2014
Media and Tragedy
I am so saddened by the news of the MH370 flight over the weekend. I don't want to speculate or discuss rumours, what I want to say is how disappointed I was with all the intrusive photographs of family members grieving. Surely, in what must be the worst experience in their lives, they should be left in peace? Isn't there some sort rule of respect that means they don't have to see themselves, and their pain, plastered over the internet and newspapers?
I read of the 65 year old father having to flee the media scrum under police escort, as he made his way to the room set up for family members.
This tragedy is something that anyone who flies can relate to. It is something that has made a large proportion of the world heartbroken. I don't think the pictures add to the story. I think they sensationalise tragedy for entertainment.
Shame on us for wanting that. Our want is what makes them do it.
And that is very sad. We can do better. We must do better.
If you agree with me, let your voice be heard by not clicking on links that promote those images.
Linking up with Essentially Jess for IBOT.
I read of the 65 year old father having to flee the media scrum under police escort, as he made his way to the room set up for family members.
This tragedy is something that anyone who flies can relate to. It is something that has made a large proportion of the world heartbroken. I don't think the pictures add to the story. I think they sensationalise tragedy for entertainment.
Shame on us for wanting that. Our want is what makes them do it.
And that is very sad. We can do better. We must do better.
If you agree with me, let your voice be heard by not clicking on links that promote those images.
Linking up with Essentially Jess for IBOT.
Monday, 3 February 2014
A time for change
As I preface all my political posts, you are welcome to disagree with me, but I will delete any abusive comments aimed at me, other commenters or the members of the Liberal Party as individuals.
As someone who grew up in the hangover of the cold war, where Communism was feared as evil and the dictatorships around the world were far from benign, I acknowledge I have a somewhat knee-jerk reaction when someone wants to control the media and stop the people of a nation accessing the news in any form other than party press releases.
That said, while we may be divided on our opinions on refugees, gay marriage, education, medicare and other political issues, I can not fathom there is anyone, Liberal or Labor, that approves of silencing the media unless they only promote positive party propaganda.
We are proud to be a democracy, we have joined forces to defend that right in other countries around the globe. A democracy, in order to work, requires informed voters. The media needs to tell both sides of the argument, so the voter can weigh up where they stand on the issue. The people of Australia need to be very alarmed if this right to the freedom of speech is being taken away from them, in the dubious form of 'funding cuts'. Even that act of censorship is covert and doused in propaganda.
Look throughout history, whenever people come to power and take control of the media, it is usually because they are doing the wrong thing. If they truly believe they are acting in the best interests of the people, they can take some criticism and let the benefits of the policy speak in their defence. If you need to control the media, there is usually something that needs to be hidden. That is what the Australian public needs to be most concerned with. If it needs to be kept secret, it is probably not in our best interests.
Liberal MP Mr Craig Laundy said it best "as a proud Liberal, they (the ABC voicing their opinions) ABSOLUTELY have the right to do so without fear or favour. The best part of 'freedom of the press' is that you get a HUGE variety of views - just as you get in society." He goes on to say, that if you don't like what the ABC are saying, seek out the other opinion, the other side of the argument. Change the channel. Even Voltaire, who distrusted democracy because it gave power to the 'idiocy of the masses', staunchly defended free speech.
This quote, and those opinions voiced by Mr Turnbull, defending editorial independence, give me hope that not all is rotten in the governing party. However, if the Prime Minister intends to take away the access to independent media from the Australian public, then everybody, no matter who you vote for, needs to unite in action and take a stand.
I am not advocating to throw out the Liberal party, nor even demand another election, but Mr Abbott needs to be told that the people, whom he represents, finds his behaviour unacceptable and he should step aside. Tony Abbott is a representative of the Australian people. It seems to me that through either arrogance or denial, he has forgotten his actions are accountable to us. We deserve the right to be informed, honestly, of what those actions are. We need to demand the right to access independent news.
I would also like to remind Mr Abbott that the ABC is not just a news station. They provide locally produced entertainment, children's television and film. He is punishing not just the journalists, but the Australian Film and Television industry. Isn't this something he should be promoting? It appears to me this threatened action is a personal vendetta, rather than a just and considered funding issue. Politics is no place for those that can't keep their personal feelings and beliefs in check.
Laundy and Turnbull clearly do not agree with what the ABC was reporting, but they do agree on the journalistic independence. This is the stance of a true politician. Let's get a real politician running our country. It's time for a change.
What to do?
Get out in force at rallys. Make your opinion noticed. Sydney March in March is on the 16th at 1pm.
https://www.facebook.com/events/267057476785262/
Get Up have a petition and are fund raising to take on this battle. https://www.getup.org.au/campaigns/media/save-the-abc--2/protect-our-abc--2
Spread the word and start the conversation. Think of the implications of this move. Is unbiased information, or uncontrolled media really something we're prepared to lose?
Please add other suggestions in the comments below.
No matter what your political leanings, it is time to take a stand. As Moore states in V for Vendetta "People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people". We are at a fork in the road. Which path are you prepared to take? Let your voice, and the voice of others, be heard.
Linking up with this old post with The Lounge for the prompt of television, after tech issues made my best intentions go awry. Sorry that the plan of action is out of date.
Laundy quote from the Sydney Morning Herald article: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/malcolm-turnbull-defends-abc-after-tony-abbotts-attack-20140129-31n5z.html#ixzz2rwPCbMlG
As someone who grew up in the hangover of the cold war, where Communism was feared as evil and the dictatorships around the world were far from benign, I acknowledge I have a somewhat knee-jerk reaction when someone wants to control the media and stop the people of a nation accessing the news in any form other than party press releases.
That said, while we may be divided on our opinions on refugees, gay marriage, education, medicare and other political issues, I can not fathom there is anyone, Liberal or Labor, that approves of silencing the media unless they only promote positive party propaganda.
We are proud to be a democracy, we have joined forces to defend that right in other countries around the globe. A democracy, in order to work, requires informed voters. The media needs to tell both sides of the argument, so the voter can weigh up where they stand on the issue. The people of Australia need to be very alarmed if this right to the freedom of speech is being taken away from them, in the dubious form of 'funding cuts'. Even that act of censorship is covert and doused in propaganda.
Look throughout history, whenever people come to power and take control of the media, it is usually because they are doing the wrong thing. If they truly believe they are acting in the best interests of the people, they can take some criticism and let the benefits of the policy speak in their defence. If you need to control the media, there is usually something that needs to be hidden. That is what the Australian public needs to be most concerned with. If it needs to be kept secret, it is probably not in our best interests.
Liberal MP Mr Craig Laundy said it best "as a proud Liberal, they (the ABC voicing their opinions) ABSOLUTELY have the right to do so without fear or favour. The best part of 'freedom of the press' is that you get a HUGE variety of views - just as you get in society." He goes on to say, that if you don't like what the ABC are saying, seek out the other opinion, the other side of the argument. Change the channel. Even Voltaire, who distrusted democracy because it gave power to the 'idiocy of the masses', staunchly defended free speech.
This quote, and those opinions voiced by Mr Turnbull, defending editorial independence, give me hope that not all is rotten in the governing party. However, if the Prime Minister intends to take away the access to independent media from the Australian public, then everybody, no matter who you vote for, needs to unite in action and take a stand.
I am not advocating to throw out the Liberal party, nor even demand another election, but Mr Abbott needs to be told that the people, whom he represents, finds his behaviour unacceptable and he should step aside. Tony Abbott is a representative of the Australian people. It seems to me that through either arrogance or denial, he has forgotten his actions are accountable to us. We deserve the right to be informed, honestly, of what those actions are. We need to demand the right to access independent news.
I would also like to remind Mr Abbott that the ABC is not just a news station. They provide locally produced entertainment, children's television and film. He is punishing not just the journalists, but the Australian Film and Television industry. Isn't this something he should be promoting? It appears to me this threatened action is a personal vendetta, rather than a just and considered funding issue. Politics is no place for those that can't keep their personal feelings and beliefs in check.
Laundy and Turnbull clearly do not agree with what the ABC was reporting, but they do agree on the journalistic independence. This is the stance of a true politician. Let's get a real politician running our country. It's time for a change.
What to do?
Get out in force at rallys. Make your opinion noticed. Sydney March in March is on the 16th at 1pm.
https://www.facebook.com/events/267057476785262/
Get Up have a petition and are fund raising to take on this battle. https://www.getup.org.au/campaigns/media/save-the-abc--2/protect-our-abc--2
Spread the word and start the conversation. Think of the implications of this move. Is unbiased information, or uncontrolled media really something we're prepared to lose?
Please add other suggestions in the comments below.
No matter what your political leanings, it is time to take a stand. As Moore states in V for Vendetta "People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people". We are at a fork in the road. Which path are you prepared to take? Let your voice, and the voice of others, be heard.
Linking up with this old post with The Lounge for the prompt of television, after tech issues made my best intentions go awry. Sorry that the plan of action is out of date.
Laundy quote from the Sydney Morning Herald article: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/malcolm-turnbull-defends-abc-after-tony-abbotts-attack-20140129-31n5z.html#ixzz2rwPCbMlG
Thursday, 7 November 2013
Confidence - women in the media
Last night on Facebook, there was a photo of an over-weight woman in her underwear posted on a site run by women saying 'This sort of strength and self-love should be celebrated not derided'. It was obviously click bait to make us say she looked fat, or had huge health issues. My issue is not even with the cheap tactics used to insult women. My issue, is that it reinforces the idea that women are to be objectified on their looks. Not only that, women should see their self worth in their ability to post naked or semi-naked photos of themselves on the internet. Way to go, female empowerment!
If you are a site for women, perhaps a good way to promote confidence in women, is to tell the stories of confident women that actually DO something. There's a thought. A confident woman who can play with the big boys, not just send them sexy photos in her underwear.
I hope this site understands they can never criticise politicians for condescending to women in the workplace, or rappers for objectifying women, if they themselves encourage the same condescension and objectification, encouraging confidence by saying 'Strong women are ok with naked photos of themselves'. You can not have it both ways.
To paraphrase Tina Fey, I would say strong women get things done.
Here's a little story of a confident woman and action that I would celebrate. Elizabeth Blackburn is a scientist, she won the Nobel Prize for her discoveries in cell research (short version, she discovered 2 things that are integral in understanding genetic diseases and cancer, and thus aiding eventually finding cures). That, however, is not the bit that we're celebrating in this story. She was on the Bush panel for Council for Bioethics. When he took a stand on stem cell research, she didn't agree. She walked in and had the confidence to tell him to shove it. I'm pretty sure she wasn't in her underwear or naked at the time. She didn't actually tell him to shove it, she argued her beliefs, and was subsequently let go, as a result. She publicly told the media why she believed she was let go, and why she believed it was the wrong course of action for the Bush Government to take. That is strength and confidence that should be celebrated. Standing for your beliefs, even if it's at your own detriment, or by achieving great things, that's what we should using as our yardstick for celebrating confident women.
I understand that body image is a huge issue for women. I would prefer if the women in the media encouraged women to look at action and achievement, not the outer casing.
Can the merit of a woman not be her ability to parade around in her underwear, pandering to men? If women reinforce that, how can we then get annoyed with men that objectify women?
If you are a site for women, perhaps a good way to promote confidence in women, is to tell the stories of confident women that actually DO something. There's a thought. A confident woman who can play with the big boys, not just send them sexy photos in her underwear.
I hope this site understands they can never criticise politicians for condescending to women in the workplace, or rappers for objectifying women, if they themselves encourage the same condescension and objectification, encouraging confidence by saying 'Strong women are ok with naked photos of themselves'. You can not have it both ways.
To paraphrase Tina Fey, I would say strong women get things done.
Here's a little story of a confident woman and action that I would celebrate. Elizabeth Blackburn is a scientist, she won the Nobel Prize for her discoveries in cell research (short version, she discovered 2 things that are integral in understanding genetic diseases and cancer, and thus aiding eventually finding cures). That, however, is not the bit that we're celebrating in this story. She was on the Bush panel for Council for Bioethics. When he took a stand on stem cell research, she didn't agree. She walked in and had the confidence to tell him to shove it. I'm pretty sure she wasn't in her underwear or naked at the time. She didn't actually tell him to shove it, she argued her beliefs, and was subsequently let go, as a result. She publicly told the media why she believed she was let go, and why she believed it was the wrong course of action for the Bush Government to take. That is strength and confidence that should be celebrated. Standing for your beliefs, even if it's at your own detriment, or by achieving great things, that's what we should using as our yardstick for celebrating confident women.
I understand that body image is a huge issue for women. I would prefer if the women in the media encouraged women to look at action and achievement, not the outer casing.
Can the merit of a woman not be her ability to parade around in her underwear, pandering to men? If women reinforce that, how can we then get annoyed with men that objectify women?
Thursday, 5 September 2013
Living out loud
I am fully aware of the irony of what I'm about to write, but there is something in the news today got me thinking (and it's something that crops up almost daily).
When something happens, how does the media get access to people's Facebook page status? How do they get their photos? Do they hack in? Does Facebook hand it over? Or do 'friends' pass it on? If we have a personal facebook page, or pinterest/twitter/instagram account, have we really handed over all rights to privacy?
If so, do we need to keep that in mind when we post our kids/thoughts/selves? (Topics of catfishing and facial recognition issues will be saved for another day - it's just too big to even get my head around yet).
Do we need to consider how to keep in touch without sacrificing privacy?
(Obviously, as a blogger, we are sacrificing a certain amount of that privacy. Even then, it can feel at times, you are only talking to one or two people, especially on twitter, but it needs to be noted it is for the whole wide web to see).
I do not know how the media gets it's hands on people's facebook material, but I for one do not want to read the status of a grieving person, or a person in a difficult situation. their message to their friends and loved ones should stay just that.
Of course, the article that prompted this, the woman herself may have released the details in order for the other party to see them, on the chance he was not able to access online.
Which then brings us to the kids. The kids who will grow up with every thought and deed they ever committed following them around for their whole adult life.
I don't have an answer, but it is something quite complex to think about. Mind bogglingly difficult, with what complications and consequences may follow.
It's alien enough to make you think - online, everyone can hear you scream*.
Linking up with some Grace for FYBF.
* (that's a joke for the old people)
When something happens, how does the media get access to people's Facebook page status? How do they get their photos? Do they hack in? Does Facebook hand it over? Or do 'friends' pass it on? If we have a personal facebook page, or pinterest/twitter/instagram account, have we really handed over all rights to privacy?
If so, do we need to keep that in mind when we post our kids/thoughts/selves? (Topics of catfishing and facial recognition issues will be saved for another day - it's just too big to even get my head around yet).
Do we need to consider how to keep in touch without sacrificing privacy?
(Obviously, as a blogger, we are sacrificing a certain amount of that privacy. Even then, it can feel at times, you are only talking to one or two people, especially on twitter, but it needs to be noted it is for the whole wide web to see).
I do not know how the media gets it's hands on people's facebook material, but I for one do not want to read the status of a grieving person, or a person in a difficult situation. their message to their friends and loved ones should stay just that.
Of course, the article that prompted this, the woman herself may have released the details in order for the other party to see them, on the chance he was not able to access online.
Which then brings us to the kids. The kids who will grow up with every thought and deed they ever committed following them around for their whole adult life.
I don't have an answer, but it is something quite complex to think about. Mind bogglingly difficult, with what complications and consequences may follow.
It's alien enough to make you think - online, everyone can hear you scream*.
Linking up with some Grace for FYBF.
* (that's a joke for the old people)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)