Trouble The Water

The luncheon with the directors of the documentary was quite enlightening. I think a lot of people have the image that independent media is so quick to catch on in the public because it is so innovative in comparison to the mainstream which is so censored and scripted, along with brainwashing at times. Hearing of their struggle to get their movie, which finished with such a prestigious award was eye opening that they had to endure so much hardship and rejection and decisions as to how they wanted to get their movie known. They also seemed as though they had such a mission of what they wanted to portray, or a vision in their mind, although none of it was scripted beforehand as they declared. I feel as though this is a major aspect attributable to the independent media spectrum, it is unscripted and unrehearsed, but conveys a clear, concise and somewhat controversial point of view as compared to the mainstream media.

Endowing Newspapers?

I can't help but wonder if such a theory would even be able to sustain newspapers, especially the many that exist around the country. With the example numbers given from the NYT, is a $5 billion endowment really that realistic? The popularity of papers is also decreasing, not just their revenue, therefore, why would people want to donate such large sums of money to keep the paper's running? (besides that it would be tax deductible since it would be considered a non-profit organization). It would still force newspapers to compete against each other, vying for donations from the readers. Although, it may lead to more news practices that the consumers are getting from the independent media, while not reading the mainstream anymore because of it. It would lead the papers away from a corporate background, while also eliminating biases, as regulations with the 501(c)3 groups.

I also found the quote calling the increasingly popular Internet news a "cesspool" of false information and "If Jefferson was right that a well-informed citizenry is the foundation of our democracy, then newspapers must be saved." There are many rumors that newspapers get some of their information from bloggers, as well as vice versa, however, it isn't just a one way street. I don't think it is possible for newspapers to control their bias if endowed by the public as is necessary, I think they would still report what they want to report, which isn't true of the independent media.

Further, I don't think this idea would last, even if it did, I don't think the NYT would be able to collect $5 billion a year for anymore than a year at most. If people have already wanted to stop reading many newspapers, why would they now want to donate them to keep them afloat?

What's Stopping the Mainstream Media?

Perhaps there have been articles or renditions of blogs about the topic in the past, however, I can't help but wonder, if the mainstream media understand their success rates are dropping while those of independent media and bloggers are going up, why do they not change their style? I know the big corporation standpoint of the corporate media has been a huge factor in shaping it what it is today, but why can they still not reinvent their dissemination methods? The independent media have harped on the mainstream for their practices, brainwashing techniques and fallacies in their reporting since they have gained the trust of readers. With this information and movies such as OUTFOXED, the mainstream has not changed a thing. Instead of taking the hits of criticism and changing the ways that are now known to not be liked by the public, they continue with the same practices, apparently hoping public opinion will just magically sway back their way. Even things such as objectivity are now out the window in many news broadcasts, which have been proven to blatantly lie to viewers. When did this become an acceptable media practice? Many wouldn't even realize that such lies exist throughout the shows, they take them to be fact, no matter how ridiculous they may seem, thinking 'what reason would they have to broadcast false information?' Such as the example given last week in class regarding a study done by Tufts University which never indeed existed. Sure you would know if you were interested in the media enough to do research into it, however, the average consumer would not. It is a wonder that the mainstream has gotten to where it is today, especially now that it is a losing position, yet still unwilling to do what is perhaps required to allow them to survive while the independent media sector is growing in popularity.