Truth & Representation
Any and every form of public representation will always have its inherent tensions. Whether journalism, public relations, or propaganda it does not matter, the tensions remain the same. According to Berger “the way we see things is affected by what we know or believe”. The truth of representation in the public opinion is extremely valuable to Governments and Journalists. They are quite capable of using this to their advantage. To explain this, the essay will identify the public’s current interpretation of public representation, examine the tensions of representation and provide an example of these tensions by discussing an issue of current significance. The issue of current significance to be used is the 2014 Russian Annexation of the Ukrainian State of Crimea.
Today, representation is more important than ever before. It is much harder to discern what is actually real or true, even though we are more enlightened than ever before. The current technologies that are available make it so much more so. “Technology has only speeded up the process, aiding truth and falsehood alike.” (Korach, 2001). From the mass production of images and symbols to the implementation of Government policy we must sort the rumour and the insignificant and concentrate on what is true. Our current interpretations come mainly from the media, the journalists. As Korach states, they, who search for the truth but cannot deliver because they all have their certain individual biases and in turn they fail to be objective about the situation. Therefore those that attempt to control us manipulate our current interpretations of public representation. This leaves the population suspicious that journalists are hiding something from us or are delu...
... middle of paper ...
... formed on the issue were being forced upon us and we had to form our opinions from disinformation from the Russian government and misinformation from the media. It comes down to control and the holding of power. We are concerned with the influence they wield because they feel they must seek control of both the situation and the population.
As this essay has stated previously, there will always be inherent tensions in any form of public representation. The tensions remain the same because the truth of a significant issue is always distorted through opinion and circumstance. We should always reflect on the information we receive and discern for ourselves if that information should be believed or not. If we do not continue to critically reflect and think then we will believe anything anyone tells us because the population can easily be influenced and manipulated.
The media takes a biased approach on the news that they cover, giving their audience an incomplete view of what had actually happened in a story. Most people believe that they are not “being propagandized or being in some way manipulated” into thinking a certain way or hearing certain “truths” told by their favorite media outlets (Greenwald 827). In reality, everyone is susceptible to suggestion as emphasized in the article “Limiting Democracy: The American Media’s World View, and Ours.” The
398).It is also stated that news divisions reduced their costs, and raised the entertainment factor of the broadcasts put on air. (p. 400). Secondly, the media determines its sources for stories by putting the best journalists on the case and assign them to areas where news worthy stories just emanates. (p.400). Third, the media decides how to present the news by taking the most controversial or relevant events and compressing them into 30 second sound-bites. (p.402). finally, the authors also explain how the media affects the general public. The authors’ state “The effect of one news story on public opinion may be trivial but the cumulative effect of dozens of news stories may be important. This shows a direct correlation between public opinions and what the media may find “relevant”. (Edwards, Wattenberg, Lineberry, 2015, p.
Another controlling method that is diffused through television, radio and written publications; is any reported information about world politics and news. Powerful political groups narrow people’s views of what is going on around them by tainting and twisting information to their own device. They decide what to say and when to say it, revealing as much or little information as desired, in ‘befitting’ instances; thus enabling them to hide information they consider deleterious to themselves, from the public. It also permits them to depict opponents in overly negative terms.
Many people have no interest in current events in the world or even their own country, and are more concerned about matters that are more trivial, and even if they were to pay a deal of attention, common news sources are often biased and don’t release information that would hurt a certain cause. It is in this way that the citizens are kept igno...
nothing but making citizens' voices, opinions, and perspectives “present” in the public policy making processes (11). When political representatives not only speak but also advocate and champion the cause of the people, both symbolize and act on behalf of the vast majority of people in the political arena, political representation then occurs. In essence, political representation refers to kind of political assistance that the political representatives give to the people at large. This seemingly straightforward definition, however, is squarely not sufficient and inadequate because it leaves the concept of political representation underspecified and does not convey the full meaning of the term. The concept of political representation carries
In America we value the freedom of the press. The press is the one place where most Americans go to get educated on issues facing their community, state, and most of all nation. Everyone knows that the media plays a major role in Americans' lives; however their role of gatekeeper is not completely understood. The press decides which issues to report and how to report them. In order to improve the nation and world, the media should present their unbiased findings to allow people to make up their own minds. However, this is not the case. The media often shows its bias. Their widespread exposure enables them to communicate their ideas to the public, regardless of the public's responsiveness. The elections of officials for the federal government during the late 20th century serve as prime examples of their bias. An analysis of surveys, media delivery, and reporter's testimonies, I have found that the media is actually more out of touch with mainstream America than the politicians they cover.
First, the role of the media is to represent the public and intervene between the public and the government. The media is a mirror, which re...
The news media rejects the fact that they are biased. They claim that they are the “middle of the road,” and are neutral on the stories that they cover. Publishers also claim that they are the watchdog for the political system, and they make sure that the system is free of any corruption, or wrongdoing. Th...
Have a conversation with someone in America today about the state of government, and it is almost guaranteed that the conversation will turn towards expressing a deep confusion, even mistrust, about the role of government in the lives of citizens. Indeed, it is almost an unconscious part of our society’s collective understanding that to be critical of government is not only a right, but also a duty. This, I believe, can be partly attributed to a general lack of insight, into the incredible complexity of governing. But, I also believe the ambivalence of citizens toward our government can be explained as a reaction to the shortcomings inherent in our modern system of governance – specifically, the shortcomings of the bureaucracy of our federal
The press is essential in gaining the support of the people. During the world wars, “journalists considered themselves a part of the war effort”(Press Freedom vs. Military Censorship). However, the military fears that if the public is informed of the true war conditions, then they would be less willing to encourage the suffering of their loved ones. “Starting with the Korean War and then Vietnam, the press took an increasingly independent and critical view of the military...When the war in Southeast Asia finally ended, many in the military blamed the press for ‘losing Vietnam’”(Press Freedom vs. Military Censorship). On the contrary, lying to gain the misplaced trust of the people has an equally crippling effect. “Such phony optimism will encourage public support in the short run, just as false low assessments of the enemy’s size did early in the war in Vietnam, but it undermines support in the long run along with the precious trust in government”(Etzioni). Citizens cannot have faith in a government that would deceitfully manipulate them. Censorship doesn’t preserve the support of the people--it destroys
Amy, J. 1997. Full Representation: The Case for a Better Election System. USA: Crescent Street Press.
Simply stated, to represent is simply to “make present again.” On this definition, political representation is the activity of making the people’s voices, opinions, and perspectives “present” in the public policy making processes. Political representation occurs when political actors speak, advocate, symbolize, and act on the behalf of others in the political arena. In simpler terms, political representation is a kind of political assistance. The concept of political representation has a number of competing dimensions: our common understanding of political representation is one that contains different and conflicting conceptions of how political representatives should represent and hold representatives to standards that are mutually incompatible. One reason that the concept of representation remains elusive is that theories of representation often apply only to particular kinds of political actors within a particular context. How individuals represent an electoral district is treated differently from how social movements or informal organizations
This move made the public sphere to be dominated by the co-operate world and the administration resulting to decline of democracy, individuality and various forms of freedom. This is from the fact that unlike the bourgeois time when public sphere was of good interest to the whole society since they participated in making the decision, with time, the growth of rational and universalistic politics grew. This was as a result of the state using the press for impression rather for passing the information to the public. The public was therefore infuriated by the state of affairs and the reason for the growth of the public sphere, (Habermas, 1989).The growth of the capitalistic economy led to the uneven distribution of resource, and the public were not happy about this as it widened he economic polarity. Public sphere therefore brought up a new form of the public press which was able to listen to the ordinary people and listen to their cries as much as criticizing the governing, (Hauser, 2008). Habermas views the public sphere on structural transformation as a form of manifestation of the contingent issues in the social order. The public sphere is a transformative agent for the growth of a scenario in the society where the public outcry can be focused and discussed and examined. Habermas views the transformation as a form of social disintegration. The public sphere can be disintegrated if the public is not given attention through forums and chances to grow or else becomes then
... small media reforms (like public journalism) will be enough to reduce the commercial and corporate imperatives driving our existing media systems (Hackett and Zhao, 1998, p. 235). Instead, a fundamental reform of the entire system is needed, together with a wider institutional reform of the very structures the media systems work within, our democracies. This will be a difficult task, due to powerful vested interests benefiting from the status quo, including media, political and economic elites. Reforms will need to be driven by campaigns mobilising public support across the political spectrum, to enable the citizens of the world to have a media system that works to strengthen democratic principles as opposed to undermining them. This task is challenging, but it will become easier once people begin to understand the media’s role in policymaking within our democracies.
It’s true the media can shape the views of the public and can serve as a legitimate source that is empowered to analyze a situation and propose possible solutions because it allows the public to believe in its credibility and impartiality, at least that is what we seem to know. However, in reality, research and studies have shown that the media can generate dissent from the public by focusing or repeating information intended to sway the public. The Arab-Israeli conflict has been a topic of consistent debate for many decades, but in this paper, I will simply focus on what we don’t know about the hidden bias in coverage of this conflict.