Media reaction to contemporary events and issues

Media Reaction

The process of Globalization has made it possible for people with all kinds of backgrounds to interact and socialize. The media is mainly responsible for the way that people are seen and for the way that differences between people are being perceived by a worldwide public. In the present day, it is only natural for the media to avoid having to create divergences by mentioning any kind of aspects that would generate disputes between them and a certain minority. However, according to Theodore Glasser, Isabel Awad, and John W. Kim, the media needs to look more into the problem and attempt to deal with diversity.

The Claims of Multiculturalism and Journalism's Promise of Diversity is a study intended to present the public with a closer look inside the various topics raised by the media in various recent articles. Apparently, writers, journalists, and mostly everyone working in the media generally prefer to pass up subjects involving differences between people. Moreover, people employed in the domain would rather support a certain group being segregated than try and analyze the causes for the respective group being discriminated. In order to solve a problem, one needs to pay attention to its causes first and only then would that respective person be able to successfully put an end to the situation.

Because of the fact that diversity is deeply engraved in the history of the U.S., its people are accustomed to being protective to all minorities. Most U.S. citizens generally believe that they would only suffer if they would not intervene and provide a privileged treatment to those apparently suffering from discrimination. Despite such a performance does not seem to be harmful, it can actually act as discrimination from behalf of the one wanting to provide assistance. People can actually be affected for receiving credit for their backgrounds instead of receiving it for their qualities.

The U.S. public is largely influenced by the media, with the masses usually guiding themselves according to what they find out about in the news, books, or cinemas. It is of no surprise that some often have false convictions relating to certain matters. What is disturbing is that a number of people involved in the media are not worthy of holding their present positions. The public needs to know that they have to consult several sources when attempting to make an opinion on something. Also, they need to learn how to differentiate a professional source from an amateurish one.

As presented in the Claims of Multiculturalism and Journalism's Promise of Diversity, the public forms an opinion about a certain matter depending on the source in which they look into. Journalists need to be impartial when writing on a specific subject, since it would only mean that they would send a wrong message to the public in case that they choose to involve their personal opinions on the topic.

Glasser's, Awad's, and Kim's study analyzes how four newspapers have written from different points-of-view relating to the same event. Two of the newspapers have written professionally, without attempting to influence the readers in any way. In contrast, the other two newspapers have written so that the public would get a wrong idea of the incident. Just as in the present case, it is normal for media services from within a local community to write differently than bigger, more specialized, media services. The journalists from the two newspapers which have distorted reality and have written the articles from their own points-of-view belong to the community involved in the incident discussed. The respective journalists have turned an ordinary conflict (between the officials and their community over the building of a mall) into a cry for help from a community presumably discriminated for years.

It is of no relevance whether or not the respective journalists were right or not and if their community had actually been discriminated by the authorities. What is worrying is that the public can see how newspapers are not always impartial, and, that in the cases when journalists are implicated in the topic being discussed, articles are unpleasantly altered.

The writers from the two local newspapers have forgotten what their main duty as journalists had been. The newspapers have taken advantage of the fact that their community had previously been reported of suffering from discrimination. Using this information, the writers have gone as far as comparing the people involved in the mall incident with those that had formerly segregated their district.