WhatFinger


Internet's capability to allow millions to connect and discuss in an open forum the stories that are on the news and compare notes?

An essay on the power of the Media and why they lost our trust



When I first heard of the shootings in Arizona my heart sank. I felt grief for the families and anger at whoever did this. At the time I did not even know the name of the shooter. Admittedly I was inwardly concerned that this might be someone who had an ax to grind with the Democrats because of their power grab of individual liberty over the last two years. I was inwardly concerned that some crackpot from the right was going to ruin all the hard work of the Tea Party and the Conservative movement in some crazed murder spree. I had inward thoughts of another Tim McVey. The traditional media outlets tried very hard and very early to help me conclude that my initial fears were reality. Why were they not successful?

Support Canada Free Press


Within two hours after the first news broke on the story of the shooting in Tuscon, the media were already vilifying the Conservative movement in America and placing the blame for these senseless killings squarely on their shoulders. Four days later, a lifetime in today's 24-hour news cycle, the mainstream media had already failed in their effort to own and control the story.   The mainstream media was playing by the old rules.  The old rules say that if you get the jump on a story and are the first to break it, you can then control which information reaches the public.  This was a valid tactic in a time when there were only a handful of media outlets.  They missed the memo. Those days are over.  The media giants and popular evening news anchors at one time could control not only what was reported but how it was reported.  They had the power to win or lose wars and topple Presidents.  They had the power to bury a story or make someone or something an overnight sensation.  In short, they had the power to direct the public in whichever way was most beneficial to their personal political viewpoints or agenda. Times have changed. What specifically has changed then? Is it their center to conservative competitor Fox News that has stripped them of the media monopoly? Is it that America largely sees the media as in the pocket with unyielding support for an unpopular President, thereby creating a disconnect with viewers? Is it that Americans have seen since the 2008 election media that is openly and blatantly biased? Is it the Internet's capability to allow millions to connect and discuss in an open forum the stories that are on the news and compare notes?   I think the answer is D.) all of the above.  Since the invention of the nightly news and media giants they have always been biased one way or another.  The reason Americans did not really understand this is because there was no other option as to where they attained their information.  There was no other product on the shelf for them to compare with.  Americans could not shop for their news.  Forty years ago when I was just a kid, there were only 7 channels to choose from and only three of those produced national news.  There was not exactly a huge selection of media outlets to choose from.   Today, with the internet and scores of competing news outlets on cable TV news and information is a shopping extravaganza for the public. They were not successful because within the first three days as more and more information became known about the killer, the more clear it became that this murderer was not politically motivated but was instead a mentally deranged lunatic.  I began to see the frustration in the talking heads as the story unfolded.  They were no longer capable of managing this story.  They had lost control of the flow of the information that previously could have been used to easily destroy any political opponent.  They unleashed a torrent of blatant bias and unsubstantiated attacks against their political enemies while ignoring the hypocrisy of those they support.  All while their torrent of insults and vilifying accusations flowed across TVs in America, the majority of Americans were receiving their news and updates on the story from other outlets on the internet, smart phones and social networking.  Most received the news on their Facebook pages, smart phones and Yahoo news long before they got home from work to hear the evening news.  The harder they tried to convince people that the Conservative movement in America was evil the more audiences began to tun them out because they had lost their credibility.  It was once said that  Walter Cronkite was the most powerful man in the world.  In one single broadcast during the Tet Offensive in the Vietnam War, he announced the War in Vietnam was lost.  The sight of the enemy inside the American Embassy as staffers in civilian shirts and neckties along with a few good Marines fought for their lives on national TV, Walter Cronkite had decided that America could not win.  The Marines won that battle and effectively annihilated the Viet Cong in the following days of fighting, but that fact was of no consequence.  Walter had said the War was lost and America believed him. It was only a matter of time from that point forward.   There was no one with enough credibility in the media to counter his powerful point of view.  Cronkite said it, therefore it was a fact because he was after all, "the most trusted man in the news".  Walter Cronkite had that kind of power because people trusted that what he said.  The mainstream media has lost that power because there now exist a full shelf of differing  opinions than the ones they want you to hear.  They have been continuously exposing themselves for their bias with every breaking news story.  They have destroyed the trust they once had with the public and therefore have destroyed their monopoly of information.  Ultimately, I believe the final segment has yet to be covered.  What I do know is that if the mainstream media wishes to continue to exist, they are going to have to reinvent themselves within the context of the new rules of information control and at the same time regain the trust of the American people.    Respectful I Remain, Christopher S. Watson Texas Army NG Sgt. (ret)   Christopher S. Watson, retired military after 18 years of service and 3 combat tours. However, I have never forgotten my oath. I tip my hat to all those who serve or have served before me and more especially so towards those who gave the last full measure for Freedom.


View Comments

Guest Column Christopher S. Watson -- Bio and Archives

Items of notes and interest from the web.


Sponsored