In today's age, news can broadcast to mass audience in an instant with ease. This is a relatively new progression in news distribution but i think one of the main detriments to this outcome is that news organizations have grew to an enormous size. Hundreds of years ago news traveled by word of mouth or by humans traveling on foot to different city's and towns. The source of the information would be only one of the few with the knowledge of worlds events. Taking this into mind, it would be hard to get a different outlook on the report if they questioned it as communication was limited. Life without the internet, who'd of thought it ?
The 1800's saw the invention and rise of the steam powered printing press machine. This was one of the first times newspapers could be spread on a mass scale. By the end of the 19th Century Europe and North America were linked on day to day basis by the advancement of the Transatlantic telegraph table . This meant that information was able to be sent and received on the same day which eradicated the need for ships to send messages which took at least 10 days. In the 1930's, the Alexandra Palace mast was turned on, allowing mass audiences to watch the Television. The only channel to be broadcast for the next 20 years would be the BBC, which now had the capability to instill the same message into millions of people.
With the likes of the BBC, CNN and Rupert Murdoch's News International who all either own or broadcast news all over the world, there is growing skepticism about how much independence there actually is in the news industry market. These organizations often report the same story's with slight differences but still with the same core message. As well as this, because of the fast paced movement of news such as news 24, there is always a need for fresh news to be broadcast to the nations. But with this, often comes bogus stories as each organization will broadcast the same news as too not be seen behind there opponent. This became apparent with the so called capture of Saif al-Islam in August. Many reports told the public that he was captured, only for him to turn up on the streets of Tripoli the next day. This was done without checking the source of the information which turned out to be the ICC (International Criminal Court), something which you would of thought would be essential. Reports from the Telegraph and Reuters. Was this just an innocent mistake by the newspapers, or, is this just one of the many cases where the government use News as a tool to instill fear into the heart of Libyans, who had already witnessed NATO missiles and bombs destroying their land. It seems to me that misleading impressions is rife today. It's key to note here that the west will profit around $300 billion from this extermination.
The rise of the internet has enabled any human to become a citizen journalist anytime. It is now possible to get a different angle on the news, through advancements such as mobile's and camera's, images and video's can now be caught on tape and publicized through the internet domain. As well as this, through sites such as twitter and facebook, these files can now be distributed on a global scale. For example, on the day of the 7/7 bombings, the first reports were from civilians in the area who had taken images and videos, which resulted in them being sent to news agencies. It is now possible to be up to date in an instance, even when a news crew is not present.
As well this, it would seem it is getting easier for the population to catch out illegitimate reports and articles as we ourselves become the journalist. Citizens and local officials reported that NATO have been destroying food supplies, water supplies and hospitals, in effect taking out it's infrastructure and committing war crimes on the Libyan population. They alerted journalists to there findings youtube .
There is no doubt that the internet is transforming the way we look at news.
No comments:
Post a Comment