News The Truth Behind Media Ownership & Control

  • Thread starter Thread starter Burnsys
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion highlights concerns about media ownership, asserting that a small number of corporations control major news outlets, which influences the information presented to the public. Participants express skepticism about the media's reliability, suggesting that it often disseminates propaganda rather than objective news. The conversation touches on the implications of media concentration, including potential biases and the suppression of dissenting viewpoints. Some argue that the responsibility for seeking balanced news lies with individuals, while others criticize the media for failing to show the realities of war and other critical issues. Overall, the thread emphasizes the need for critical engagement with media sources to uncover the truth.
  • #101
jammieg said:
Here is a story in USA Today by Greg Toppo about government manipulation of the populace.
Toughie: I see journalistic ethics (oxymoron?) issues there and possibly an allocation of funds issue with the government paying him for it. There is, of course, nothing wrong with the government sponsoring advertising campaigns, but to do it in an underhanded way may be an issue.

Frankly, I see this as more of an ethics issue for the journalist than for the gov't (and if its not a conflict of interest for the journalist, it can't be for the government).
Anyway it's all lies for the greater good right?
Where in that article did it say anything about lies?
Do you think it's right to accept money from government for telling others about this "something you believe in" sort of thing?
Whether from the government or from Merck, it is unethical if you're a journalist to do so. If you're just a random celebrity, there is, of course, nothing wrong with it. That's why I'm not sure about this: is this guy actually a "journalist" or just a talk-show host, and is it possible/ethical to be both at the same time?

From the article:
Williams, 45, a former aide to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, is one of the top black conservative voices in the nation. He hosts The Right Side on TV and radio, and writes op-ed pieces for newspapers, including USA TODAY, while running a public relations firm, Graham Williams Group.
Op-ed pieces aren't news, but still, it seems to me the guy may be trying to play both sides. Its a fine line, that many (if not most) on-air personalities try to tow. I'm sure you've all heard radio personalities doing little plugs for various products on their shows.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #102
And here's today's repsponse from that story:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-01-08-williams-folo_x.htm

Near the bottom of the story it talks about how our government used a similair method or what they sometimes call "permissible use of taxpayer funds under legal government contracting procedures." to promote medicare and received a scolding from the accountability department- oh my goodness.

Williams says today, "...My judgment was not the best. I wouldn't do it again, and I learned from it."

Like how to make a quick retiremnet fund for yourself by selling out the people who trust and believe in you?
You would think if he actually meant it he would give the money back, I mean that's generally what people do when they learn from their mistakes is correct them, not say a bunch of words to make things appear ok, but then it only takes about $500 to give most poeple a clear conscience.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

Replies
59
Views
13K
Replies
21
Views
5K
Replies
12
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Back
Top