Posted: Apr 11, 2012 8:42 am
Jakov wrote:Loren Michael wrote:Jakov wrote:Can they really be said to be doing this willingly when they have almost no other source of information than the corporate-controlled media?Jeffersonian-marxist wrote:Perhaps "willfully" was the wrong word to use, but I agree that it is corporate-based media that ultimately wins the hearts and minds of the population regarding the relevant issues.
Do you to have any of the [citations needed] to make such assertions?
Given that the highest-rated cable news program, Fox News, has a viewership of less than 1% of the US population AND less than 1% of people who actually vote, I'm skeptical of those kinds of claims.
You take it for granted that we think Fox news is the only bad one. Our hypothesis is that all media subject to market pressures behave like this.
That includes supposedly liberal outlets like The Guardian newspaper.
I wrote some of my thoughts about this back in 2011 when I started to realise it.
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/news- ... 24772.html
I guess I should update it a little and rebutt some of the points.
I cited Fox News because it is the highest-rated of the cable bunch. If that single network's viewership is less than 1% of the US population/voting population, and it's the highest-rated, I'm thinking that suggests the others are also minuscule.
I'm also skeptical of the amount of "control" that business actually has over the media. Besides that though "...almost no other source of information than the corporate-controlled media" ignores vast chunks of the internet and social networks.