Legacy media, prestige media, elite media, drive-by media, standard media - you know, those people who never listened to Garth Brooks and have left him out of their histories even though he outsold everyone, not because they are ignoring him, but because they have forgotten he existed - none of the names for this group have caught on. What do you use, and expand if you like.
Thursday, October 06, 2022
Naming the Media
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I think that part of the problem is that some of the terms which are descriptive and help with understanding for some audiences will hinder it or bring up red-flags for others.
Legacy can have a tinge of no-longer-relevant.
Prestige is not an appropriate descriptor when one's point is that they've squandered their prestige.
Elite almost seems like an admission against interest in some cases.
Drive-by, Liberal, etc. limit your audience to those who already share your opinion.
I suppose I call them the media, or the press; and those outlets I might like better, “that Outlaw rag.”
Now “investigative journalists,” these days I rarely use that except for the Intercept. Half of them are Communists, but they remember the spirit of the thing.
I like "corporate media."
Gossip features heavily in the output of the narrators.
"What I don't know I can always make up" is the ironic motto of Father Simon, and apparently the real motto of journalism school.
"The narrators" is pretty good.
Also, 'the social engineers' was the term used in this prescient 1954 novel:
https://ricochet.com/871838/book-review-year-of-consent-by-kendell-foster-crossen/
Uncle Bill: I like "corporate media."
That seems to encompass most media other than personal reporting.
Keep in mind that the vast majority of actual reporting is still done by corporate media, such as reporters in war zones. Even personal reporting is normally amplified through corporate media.
Is the distinction just those sources who report on things some people don't like?
"Is the distinction just those sources who report on things some people don't like?"
Good reporting will almost always be about something that most people don't like -- fraud, murder, natural disasters, and such boring things as city council and school board meetings + many more topics. Bad reporting is more likely to be about the reactions that a few people have to something they don't like OR to attempt to get an "unfavorable" reaction from people the reporters don't like.
Frankly, I have trouble taking seriously the reporting of ALL 'major' news networks. The "CRT" that I'd love to see taught in schools is "Critical Reading Tools".
Post a Comment