The media is often referred to as the “watchdog” of the government. It is taken for granted that the job of journalists and reporters is to monitor government actions and report them to the public with the intention of protecting and informing us.
So, very obviously, it looks a little something like this:
or this:
However, the usefulness and effectiveness of the media in this role is not as clear. In an article written by Warren Franke, he states that the only way to even partially understand medias role is by studying “the evolving institutional history of the press, including its control, ethics, laws, technology, organization, and the content of news stories.”
But the government can also play a similar role in moderating what information can be distributed through different media. What I really want to discuss in the rest of my blogs is how the media can set agendas and frame issues. As well as how the government pushes back and censors media to a certain extent.
According to the Public Broadcasters Corporation, censorship can be defined in many different ways. In ancient times it was defined as assessing or opinion giving.
However, in today’s world there is no single agreed upon definition so for the purposes of my posts I am going to define it very broadly as the “official restriction of any expression believed to threaten the political, social, or moral order.
The watchdog role of the media is often seen as a necessity to democracy and monitoring the behavior of government officials. I found this article to be very interesting and explanatory of how media, finances and the government are so interconnected.
While the many opportunities that technology like twitter, facebook – and yes even blogs - afford to journalists and politicians in getting information to the public, there are issues of credibility and transparency that deserve some thought.
Other Sources:
Franke, Warren. The Evolving Watchdog: The Media’s Role in Government Ethics. 1995.
I really enjoyed your blog post and the sources you used. I liked the point that Thomas Shattuck brought up in his article that the "agenda setting" American newspaper focus on what will draw more attention rather than what is important. Although, reading that I am saddened. We focus on quantity rather than quantity and I think it is taking a toll on our society. I mean, look at what we talked about today in class. The "Digital Death Campaign" was more about celebrities and their influence on pop culture rather than focusing on stories with meaning and value. I definitely think the watchdog function of journalist and the media is important, but I think that those in charge need to start doing a better job. I want important news on what is happening in our world other than what Lady Gaga tweeted 5 minutes ago. ~Taylor Smelt
ReplyDeleteI think it would be interesting to conduct a longitudinal study on the success of the media as a watchdog agency over time. There is a pervasive consensus that society seems to become more corrupt as time passes. Would the implications of that mean that the media is more important and active now more than ever? Or has the media become another victim of the corruption? This could even be extrapolated to contain some of the issues discussed in class, such as the death of print media, and the rise of the internet. Has this fundamental shift affected the role of the media as a watchdog? -Matthew Morris
ReplyDelete