People want to avoid being marginalized- they choose to fall into the majority group, which then gives them a sense of being right. Beyond attitudes and opinions, the images of the real world created by the mass media have creates the overtone for personal behaviors. People choose to identify with the images mass media has created. Mass media uses these theories to continue to create images, portray and dictate what makes a person. Which brings us to the next question: just who or what makes up of Mass media?
A scandal will be in the news and the stocks will fall for that specific company. However, judging by the nature of these corporations: oligopoly in an industry that has a very high cost of entry and high rate of bankruptcy, Apple and other tech giants are here to stay and they cannot fail. Because in which case, where will the people get their source of high end tech products that are well-designed and functional by a team of highly trained professionals. There is a reason why Apple and Google survives the scandals. First, technically they have ties that can clean up or just pay settlements for lawsuits from their huge assets.
Whereas, most of the time, the only crime they’ve committed is having a certain color of skin. The media has consciously shaped the minds of thousands in such a way that the white majority unconsciously blame anyone who’s different from them. Do you pay close attention to how the media breaks news to you? The news that most of us receive from mainstream media blatantly feeds us a biased distortion of the truth. The favoritism towards white people (whether they’re criminals or not) and the demonization of people of color (whether they are victims or not)in mainstream media is almost suffocating.
The SOTU demonstrated this idea easily, as many democrats sat stoney faced as Trump continued his aggressive attacks on immigration. However, though some would say this represents the stereotypical SOTU, presidents do not often clap goadingly in the direction of the silent opposition. Trump’s rhetoric during his speech transcends just his sentences. Every action contributes to a speech’s overall effect. Trump clapping in democrat direction only increased the hostility of the atmosphere and made many around the U.S realize that his immature measures would not stop anytime soon.
Money, power, and influence are three factors that can easily tip the balance of equality, especially in developing countries where liberal democracy does not have a strong presence, which are locations where the majority of multinational corporations set up factories. The act of corporations, especially powerful corporations, speaking out against human rights violations may appeal to the victims and seem to be beneficial as these corporations can set “the standard for the way of life and the mode of living of our citizens; which leads, molds and directs; which determines our perspective on our own society” (Wettstein quoting Drucker, 47). If all the negotiations regarding workers’ rights between corporations and governments happen behind the scenes, then public debate and outward opinions of the victims and the citizens would cease to retain any influence as public discussions would be further limited and suppressed, opposite of what Wettstein is trying to argue for. This would be due to two different reasons: as it is the country would be benefitting from the success of these corporations, the actions of a corporation would trump the opinions of the citizens any day, and as corporations may use their influence for good and to speak out against certain human rights violations as Wettstein discusses, they may also use their
Aside from the profit gained by the owner, the broadcast of Raffi and Nagita wedding gives impact on society. Their luxury wedding creates jealousy between high - class people and low class people. Conflict theorist creates the basic principles of capitalism – private enterprise, profit, the free market and the rights of property ownership – dominate media content and are presented as ‘normal’ and ‘natural’. There is actually little choice for audiences in that there is no radical alternative to the mainstream newspapers
Social mission and their success laid a good foundation, but is necessary to ensure that their effects fully reflected in the economy, particularly in that part of the non-oil sector. There is a tangible lack of investment. It is necessary to increase the capacity of the economy (watch the efficiency of public investments, reduce bureaucracy and corruption). Is possible to consider Chavez as successful? He managed to grasp the real power because they upset the traditional political party system, lambasted liberalism and capitalism as such and turned the masses against corrupt political parties.
Arguably the most impactful bias in the media is the political bias that can be influences and forced into media from almost anything. All of these are reason as to why the media is bias. The influence of the mainstream advertising companies on the content of media outlets cannot be overstated. Seventy percent of a media outlets income comes from advertising companies, and because of this the advertising companies have the power to pseudo threaten companies by withdrawing their ads and income. Some specific examples of high end corporations using their money as a bargaining chip is on Youtube.
Foucault talks about the Panopticon as a self-sustaining power house of discipline and how the prisoners are unknowingly prisoners of their own accord. This relates directly to how politicians are conditioned to abide by their disciplines because politicians are highly public figures and with that they are almost always visible to the public. When Foucault in relation to the Panopticon states, “Any individual, taken almost at random, can operate the machine…” (Foucault 202), this correlates to the visibility of the politicians. Any person can observe a politician; they do not have to have any specific credentials to observe or share an opinion of a politician. However, in turn they are causing the politicians to be subjected to consequences of their visibility.
Negative advertisements are commonly used in the business world and in the political arena. Most people consider negative advertising as unethical and negligent, but it can still be ethical as long as the advertiser maintains certain ethical standards. For instance, the negative advertisement