1F25 Post 2: The Media We Want?

The information presented to consumer audiences does so in a cycle so that we want the media that we get, and in turn get the media that we want. However, as I have argued in the past, a lot of sources of media feed their audiences biased information. Therefore, the consumers are in touch with media that they think they want. In reality, they have been tricked into wanting the media that they receive.

This is most evident when presented with information about world politics. Political parties will often use to their advantage the media sources that support them to indirectly advertise themselves. The power of a political party mixed with the influence of the media on consumers is capable of controlling the way that audiences think:

…media practitioners often see themselves as political watchdogs, and in this respect are referred to as the ‘fourth estate’…The media, as the fourth estate, are a body who can comment on, criticise [sic], and investigate, through free speech, what these other institutions do… (O’Shaughnessy and Stadler, Fears about political use of the media, 16).  

By presenting information that either supports or opposes the political party, the source deceives its audience into thinking that they are receiving the media that they want; people want to know which political party is up to good or bad and why or why not to support it. However, that source of media is presenting its own biased opinion and, by doing so, teaching its audience what to want to hear. As a result, the audience, under the impression that it is receiving the media it wants, actually wants the media it receives.

Our society has had a large shift in what is considered entertainment now in comparison to as little as twenty years ago.  The “Hangover humour” movies (as I like to refer to them) such as the series itself, 21 Jump Street, and This Is The End, would have been considered outrageous at the end of the 20^th century and would only target a certain mature audience. Today, they are much more casual. It is debatable whether the reason for that is because consumers want more of this entertainment or are influenced by it and as a result, demand it: “It has been suggested that the cumulative effect of consuming media that contains violent and/or sexualized content might be particularly harmful to young viewers, due in part to the tendency of young people to learn by mimesis…” (O’Shaughnessy and Stadler, Fears about the media’s influence on morals and health, 17).  

Here is a cycle where the media outputs entertainment that has a negative effect on impressionable youth. This causes a change in attitude, which causes a change in view. Now these youth want more of that entertainment. A growth in demand causes a growth in production, and the cycle begins again. Although the audiences are receiving the media that they want, the media has again trained them into wanting a certain type of it. Thus, ultimately, the audience wants the type of media that it receives.