250 The media (books, film, music, television, for example) tend to create rather than reflect the values of a society.
How does the media interact with the society is a contentious issue. Some argue that media determines the values of society. But others believe that media is just a mirror-- it reflects the condition of society instead of creates it. I opt for second opinion.
Economical principle tells us that when there is no demand, there will be no supply. Books, films music producers are operating in this free market, and hence they follow the above economical principle. These producers are adept at catching the trends and the thinking of the market to produce goods that meet the consumer demand. Any goods that don¡¯t fit the taste of the society will lose shares of the market. Media is of no exception. Thus media must go in line with the needs of society, and what the media sells will vividly picture the value of a society.
It can be unsafe for media to create values of society by introduce new vogues. This is because no one can be sure that it really works. Consumer may get distaste and discontent at the trends the media trying to impart to them. As a result, market may reject it and media will suffer tremendous loss. With this consideration in mind, media may tend to be more conservative and it's more probable for them to just reflect what the society wants instead of creating it.
One example I offer for this is paranormal sensation. Over the years US's graduates in pure science are declining; high school students are poorer at maths compared to other developed country and the funds go to scientific research are trimmed. This reflects the attitude of Americans towards science; they don't like it. Instead Americans prefer pseudoscience which is much more enigmatic. We see that medium often appear in nationwide talk show; stories of Noah Flood constantly flooding tabloids and so on. By contrast, scientific programmes or books don't sell well, prestigious scientists don't get feature in TV regularly. In fact most Americans are scientific illiterate. Viewing this, most publishers will prefer sensational stories to genuine scientific discovery. They know that talking about UFO and stuffs like that will suit the market demand while reporting Nobel Prize winners won't arouse public interest. It is natural for them to publish pseudoscience instead of real science, because they can earn dollars from it. Media doesn't create this sensations; it merely repeats it.
Another example worth mentioning is TV evangelism. Though Bible heavily influenced US, but US is actually a materialistic country. Most Americans are filled with the desire to get rich quick. The phenomena of TV evangelism were just reflecting this situation. Instead of preaching the gospel of Jesus, a lot of preachers preach the gospel of wealth. Not surprisingly, these preachers receive more donations than those preachers who preach orthodox gospel. Pulpits are more concern with getting wealthy materially instead of getting wealthy spiritually. The popularity of success theology in TV evangelism is just a mirror reflecting real situation: US is a materialistic country.
To recapitulates the point, it is the value of the market that determine the focusing lenses of the media. We can tell how a society is like by looking at the content of the media. If our media is fill with sex, violent, superstitious belief, we must be worry for it shows that our society is sick.



LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks







Reply With Quote
Bookmarks