reply to post by damagedoor
The media arent neccesarily implicit in anything. Selling fear is the nature of media. The issue is the impact and the potential for manipulation.
Why do other stories get played, because to control the entire media in a direct fashion would mean revealing an agenda to all journalists and the
loop would be too big to contain.
However the agenda can and is directed via HQ content meetings, at which point the strategy for the media is outlined, certain types of story are
given priority, the agenada of what "constitutes" headline news or front page news, the type of stories they should be leading with, all under the
banner of "selling news".
Journalists at root level most likely are just doing their jobs and following the agreed prioritisation and story typing set by these corporate
meetings. The question is how compromised is the corporate level of media and the answer is, completely.
You cant just say to a journalist they cant publish public interest stories on data loss as a rule because it would be suspect, journalists would
become aware of the agenda.
In some cases these types of stories might be "prioritised".
An example of this has been the promoting and now undermining of the Labour party. In the build up to Labor coming into power, the mainstream media
headlined daily with "charm and hope" angles on Tony Blair and th whole "new labor new hope" thing. If you consider the end of Blairism and later
coverage of Labour, its now headling with some very sour images.
Yes, of course in amongst it are a minority of sub headlines which arent negative, but the corporate agenda seems to be that "anti labour is our
selling point" and thats headline news. Was this passive or active, theres the question but in the end its irrelevant the fact it is a real
phenomenon either way.
Who set "paedophilia" as a "key event" in the news agenda for each news outlet? Corporate HQ did. News agendas are discussed, identified and
agreed upon, news at a local of station level is operated on clearly defined "agendas and guidelines" which come from corporate level strategy
The editor at any given time will have a very precise list on what is "priority news" what is "headline news" and the stories and angles are all
gathered and published to that agreed set of rules.
Once again, its coming from corporate.
You have to also remeber these people arent stupid, they dont want to SHOW the agenda, which is why huge media enterprises like News Corp, operate
more than one style of media, they can balance out the presentation of agenda across the spectrum ensuring that the balance of ideology remains
dominant to an obejective.
Also you have to consider juxtaposition and placing. HOW media ins placed is a key factor, credibility or importance is given or taken from a piece
depending how it is frame.
If you frame George Bush making a statement within two "fantasy or comedy" type pieces, you lessen the credibility and effect of the piece in the
centre, its called priming.
Likewise if your frame an agenda piece between two "social fear pieces", you magnify the effect and imapact of the segment.
You make it sound like some guesswork event, when in fact the placing, priming, positioning and balancing of news agenda and ideology is a very
complex system formed from within the very structure of news entities, all coming ultimately down to corporate level meetings which "set agenda" for
the respective publications for that week or month, or period.
Whenever there is any key event, there will be a major "agenda meeting" where corporate briefs the news teams and editors on what the agenda and
perspective should be, this is all very normal stuff within media.
However whats important is that its impact is very powerful indeed. the impact iself is fully visible in marketing theory and advertising theory, it
is an established fact that marketing and advertising science WORKS, and the very same principles apply to media which in its own right represents a
form of advertising or marketing of news agendas.
These corporations SELL news, they sell, the public buys and they market aggressively, predicting and manipulating fears to maximise impact and
Believe me, its a very powerful mechanism with very grounded and established science behind it. Individual moments arent whats important the overall
"sense" which come from the combined effects of mass media are what drives everything.