Does the media misrepresent the experiences and interests of everyday people

[beefface]

23 minutes ago, Halibut said:

Not baited. It's bated. 

Thank you for the correction.

[L00b]

3 hours ago, Cyclone said:

(...)

Frankly if you think that the BBC is left, then that just highlights to me exactly how right you are yourself.

I don't think that a 'lefty' BBC would have edited out last years's Boris insult to the French at the request of the Foreign Office:

 

https://news.sky.com/story/boris-johnsons-crude-remark-about-the-french-was-cut-by-bbc-11750421

 

nor that it would have been so selective when inviting British MEPs to QT over the past 10 years, as to manage to invite only UKIP and Brexit Party MEPs (3 Conservative MEPs form the statistical error):

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/RCorbettMEP/status/1144369238217547776

Edited June 28, 2019 by L00b
added links

[Top Cats Hat]

36 minutes ago, L00b said:

I don't think that a 'lefty' BBC would have edited out last years's Boris insult to the French at the request of the Foreign Office:

Or was the very last news organisation to report on the police attending the row at Carrie Symonds house story.

 

The BBC as an institution, very much sees its role is to act in the interests of the royal family and the Conservative Party.

[beefface]

I attempted to open a topic on a possibly interesting issue. As usual the discussion has degenerated  into the same old left v right, tory v labour cliche. I bet you lot can clear rooms.

Don’t think i’ll bother again.

[I1L2T3]

8 minutes ago, beefface said:

I attempted to open a topic on a possibly interesting issue. As usual the discussion has degenerated  into the same old left v right, tory v labour cliche. I bet you lot can clear rooms.

Don’t think i’ll bother again.

Because that is exactly what it is. 

 

We are a very polarised society. People polarise on anything and everything is treated as a binary issue. Yes people might be pleasant and nice to you when they disagree but essentially it is all about being on one side or other of a debate. Try and sit in the middle and it blows peoples’ minds. They can’t cope.

 

Is this a uniquely British thing?

[L00b]

19 minutes ago, beefface said:

I attempted to open a topic on a possibly interesting issue. As usual the discussion has degenerated  into the same old left v right, tory v labour cliche. I bet you lot can clear rooms.

Don’t think i’ll bother again.

The discussion naturally mirrors the bias inherent to any media (because impartial media doesn't really exist, short of stories relating facts only, and without analysis or commentary) : stories are only ever a 'misrepresentation' when they trigger cognitive dissonance in the reader/listener/viewer, and 'the truth' when they stroke individuals' bias.

 

After that, you can of course look at media tactics to drive media consumption, and the role which some of these tactics have in perpetuating that bias (-towards greater consumption still).

 

Witness for example the Express' very liberal use of CAPITAL letters, exclamation marks and polarising headlines, which is the print version of click-baiting social media 'stories' (-themselves not subjected to the (supposed) editorial rigour and integrity of the printed press, to begin with; meaning still less accountability and  consequences for any misrepresentations).

 

Many people have grown to like being (or needing to be-) outraged at this-that-the other, out of such practices. It makes for an ever-more polarised society, per I1L2T3's post.

Edited June 28, 2019 by L00b

[RollingJ]

10 minutes ago, beefface said:

I attempted to open a topic on a possibly interesting issue. As usual the discussion has degenerated  into the same old left v right, tory v labour cliche. I bet you lot can clear rooms.

Don’t think i’ll bother again.

As we don't have a thanks/like option on here, all I can do is 👍

 

Well said, @beefface

[lil-minx92]

I think the media sometimes try to persuade us something is popular (or otherwise) in order to try to make it popular (or otherwise). I suppose that is promotion disguised as news- misrepresenting the interests of everyday people.

I remember when One Direction split up we were bombarded with news of how Harry Styles was the next Robbie Williams. He even somehow got a heavily promoted one hour slot on the BBC at prime time despite having only released a couple of unmemorable songs. In this case the public didn't buy it and the media must have eventually realised it was flogging a dead horse. News of Harry suddenly all but disappeared.

Sometimes it seems a case of getting so called celebrities forced down our throats until we actually begin to think they are celebrities that we just hadnt realised were celebrities. 

[Top Cats Hat]

3 minutes ago, lil-minx92 said:

In this case the public didn't buy it and the media must have eventually realised it was flogging a dead horse.

It isn’t the media which was pushing Harry Styles it was his record label and his management

[lil-minx92]

3 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

It isn’t the media which was pushing Harry Styles it was his record label and his management

Yes obviously they were behind the media campaign, but the media didnt just act as a channel for paid promotion (ads etc), and how did he get a slot on prime time BBC? I didnt think you could buy BBC airtime?