For the last few days, I have been contemplating on how and how much we have increased the watching of TV in a day. Is our left and right brain still active equally, or there is a differential demand on them. The left side that works scientifically or mathematically is probably dormant these days because the entertainment and creativity aspects of our life are well taken care of by the right side.
But when I think of the news on television or print media, I am much more confused. How and why does our mind read or view the news. What effect the news have on us. I have never read any news in last 25 years, but I never missed anything great. Before that time, I read the sports page only.
Now that I pay subscription to set top box, I have one major issue in my mind. It is regarding the news and views. Are we getting the feed from the really genuine news? Is it tainted by the politician, corporate or the media’s personal biases. How strong or stronger is the paid news syndrome now? And why is the government not interesting in rectifying this anomaly. Who decides what news should be shown and what should be hidden? Not the editor.
When the channels attach a log line to their news coverage such as Fast news, 100 news, Superfast news, Breakfast news, Midday news, Prime time, I for one get confused as to which time of the day I should watch the news, and feel that I am not incomplete. And then there are Truthful news, Real news, News without distortion, and so many other titles. I wonder, if all the other news were not true or unimportant then why were they broadcast. And most of the time the news is simply repeated even if a channel claims it to be ‘The Breaking News’.
Much has happened and is happening in the media world today. First of all, we must know that the media is classified at the top level; the conventional or controlled media, and unbridled or anarchic social media. Can anyone of them be more authentic than the other? Does anyone control the social media? Whatever became of the editors of the conventional media? The authors in social media have had a tough time for all these years, getting their views published in print media.
If you need authentic information you could perhaps choose the social media, because it will be described authentically by its site owner, and it will appear quite fast, unless the owner is from a political party or from an interest group. On the other hand, the views of the controlled media are surely tainted by its owning corporate. They ensure that whatever their group wants to achieve politically, is aired?
On the other hand, propaganda, biases and orientation are dictated by the writer who posts on the social media. And if he or she has a way with the public opinion his view is carried through. So why don’t we all become the press reporters ourselves, minus the salary. The salary will come when we become famous.
One thing we must understand. What do you think is the difference between a “trend” and a “brand”? Who do you think sets up the trends? We need not be enslaved by the corporate in this respect. In the social media it is we, the authors, who post trends. We should take over this responsibility and fulfill it properly.
For example, a perfume launched by a celebrity is made popular by trending, and the vulnerable masses go in for this trended product. Or a film actor is trended for a few months before his movie is released. In contrast with branding, which lives for a long time and creates a lasting impression, the beauty of trending is that these snippets are short lived but they achieve peak sales for the duration that they live.
In short the advantages and disadvantages of anarchist social media and censured conventional media are very interesting. These difference will rule the roost for some time to come. Can we appoint a moderator for the social media just as the old time Editor was in the conventional media? Otherwise will the editors of the past will accommodate the views and opinions of new writers?