Herman and Chomsky’s Propaganda Model quite literally changed how I engage with news media-- especially pieces centered around politics. I think their ideas are not only still prevalent but have become even more relevant with the spread of social media and its engagement with the political sphere. News has become constant, and with the rapid-fire of coverage being consistently shoved down our throats, I think it’s easy to get wrapped up in the narratives presented to us without considering the implications of each individual piece. Especially now that there is an ever-growing divide present between the two prominent parties and political coverage encourages if not directly aids in this separation. And this is no coincidence. If left-leaning news sources get more clicks from bashing right-wing ideas and political figures (and vice versa) they will push more of these stories even if they hold no actual importance or even any validity. The downfall of democracy is seen as collateral damage to the corporate elites who control the media and will benefit regardless of the state of our political economy as long as their interests are being pushed (which they consistently are). As Adorno and Horkheimer said in “The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception”, “Even the manifestations of political opposites proclaim the same inflexible rhythm” (p. 53).
As I previously mentioned, we are being exposed to so much news media at once that it can be overwhelming. But, if all of our news is being propagated by the same group of media conglomerates, are we being presented with actual news or just the stories deemed worthy by those who stand to benefit from their coverage? If "The Propaganda Model" was published in 1988 and even then it could be said that "advertising-based media systems will gradually increase advertising time and marginalize or eliminate all together programming that has significant public affairs content", what does that mean for the state of programming today, over 30 years later (p. 213)? Has news become another form of public engagement in which we are passive consumers being spoon-fed narratives rather than a public sphere that provides space for active involvement and nuanced opinions formed by critical analysis? I would argue that it has, but I can't see any solution to this problem when media (and advertising) is so monopolized.
No comments:
Post a Comment