Source: D'Oro, Rachel. "Palin to media: Leave my kids alone". Deseret News. 27 September, 2009. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705279314/Palin-to-media-Leave-my-kids-alone.html?pg=2
Summary: Sarah Palin has decided to fight against the bloggers and news organizations who gossip about her children. Yet, though that may be a good motivation to argue against the news, many people are claiming that it is her way to keep her name in the spotlight. She also could be doing it to gain some supporters. Recently, Palin has been going against People's Magazine and the Associated Press that have written stories about her eldest daughter, Bristol. She argued harshly against the idea that because Bristol was pregnant, she and her fiance were high school drop outs. She also went against the rumors that her 9 month-old son, Trig, was actually conceived by Bristol in a secret and previous pregnancy. She says that she has no political intentions in fighting against the media, she just wants to protect her family. Palin said, "It's all about the family. I'm wired in a way that I can take the criticism. I can take the shots. But any mother would want to protect their children from lies and scandalous reporting" (D'Oro). When some of her comments are reported, she bickers that they are taken out of their original context and made to be a conflicting situation. Leonard Steinhorn, a professor of communications at American University in Washington, said about Palin, "I think she's exploiting and cultivating the anti-intellectual and anti-elitist side of the Republican party. She's trying to salvage her reputation, so she attacks the messenger" (D'Oro). Many others believe that she contradicts herself. Before being named as McCain's running mate, she was asked about how political figures should respond to such media. She answered that they should ignore it and not bring that kind of attention to themselves. Yet, here Palin is, doing the very thing she previously said was wrong. She insists that she isn't complaining about the treatment of the press, she merely is just protecting her children against the media who shouldn't be putting them in the spotlight. The media argues back that the children of high political figures are always in the spotlight and that they don't just attack her family. "Palin is fueling the stories she condemns by talking about them instead of ignoring them," said Janis Edwards, an associate professor of communication studies at the University of Alabama. All in all, most people aren't buying Palin's excuse of protecting her children as much as they are buying the fact that her intentions are to be and to remain in the public eye.
Response: This kind of situation has me sitting on the fence. For one, I agree with the media. They can't help to notice stories that sell and use them and they can't help it when Palin brings her family into the public view. It really is hard not to observe that Palin is using these attacks on the media to keep the attention on herself for her political career and for her hopes of running for a Presidency in 2012. But, is this the truth? Because this is what the media claims, does that mean we should also judge Palin in this way? One can fall on Sarah Palin's side and say that she is just being a protective mother. I know for one that my mother would strive hard to make sure that I was safe from gossip and rumors. But Palin's at a whole new level. This isn't just some high school kids saying whatever they want, it's in the national news, open to everyone to read, hear, and judge. She honestly could be really trying to keep that kind of embarrassment away from her children, not just herself. And who says that the media has the right to go off about such things? Having a father who works closely with political figures, I hate it when the local news writes false stories about him, claiming that he's conspiring against this or sucking up to this senator. It isn't true and only hurts our family. What I believe the media's purpose is is to be giving the public the facts about events that we can not see personally. I believe that the media crosses the line when they start to bring in negative comments and stories about certain public celebrities and their families. It refers to my previous blog that it's okay to toss in your opinion, but what the media doesn't realize is that sometimes their opinions are taken as facts. Say what you wish about Palin, but it doesn't mean that it's true, whether it sells your news or not.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Conspiracy Culture?
Source: Rubin, Trudy. "Internet fueling rise in false theories." Deseret News. 13 September, 2009. G3.
Summary: As debates are recently being played out, one question comes to mind: "Could a conspiracy culture take root here?" (Rubin). In Pakistan and the Middle East public views are being spread by conspiracy theories. If it is printed in the newspaper it must be true no matter how outlandish. After the 9/11 attack some believed that it was carried out by Jews. A couple of Saudi graduate students believed it to be true and confirmed it with Rubin, as well as a leading journalist in Pakistan; keep in mind these are educated people. Because their news is broadcasting this theory, they believe it to be true. So thank heavens that's not happening in the United States, right? Wrong, as we read our newspapers, watch news stations, and read blogs we've come to see how easily we are convinced that an opinion is fact. So what are the facts and will we ever get them? Yes, but not often; "Brave journalists who try to write truth are risking their livelihood, or their lives" (Rubin). Richard Hofstadter was one such journalist in 1964. He wrote about the anti-Masonic movement, the anti-Catholic movement, the theories on a conspiracy of international bankers, race, and more. But even with such writers things have changed drastically because of the Internet. We go on news websites and ideological websites and count that as fact. "Unverified opinions, rumors, and emotions are served up in lieu of facts, but are often accepted as gospel" (Rubin). On the subject of health care, one could read a blog about how our new president stirs up trouble and rage in citizens over the matter, and that's why people are against it. It is taken as a fact and with all these opinions going around it makes it a perfect place for conspiracy theories to begin. With the Internet spreading information so quickly it makes a wide audience have the ability to read and believe such statements and opinions. "I have seen how a conspiracy culture distorts politics in the Middle East and Pakistan. Believe me, you don't want that here" (Rubin).
Response: I agree with Trudy Rubin that many times the American public will take opinion as fact. We are shown this through commercials; because one celebrity we like says they use this kind of acne care, we believe that it is the most effective and we buy and use the product. But that is either staged or just that celebrity's opinion. We hear it through the news and journalists, those very people we trust to give us the events that we personally can not see, and we believe them. Many times those events are told through opinions, but its hazed over as if what we are being told is a fact. So are their conspiracy theories? I personally don't believe there are and won't until literally proved there are. In some ways I wonder if Rubin is a little hypocritcal. For example, Obama's government single payer health plan could very well lead to rationed health care, expecially to the elderly. It appears to have done so in Great Britain and in Canada. She mentioned a lot in her article that Sarah Palin and Sen. Chuck Grassley made untrue claims about Obama's health care ideas that convinced some of the public to be against it by refering to potential decisions to withhold highly expensive medocal care from the aged as "death panels" ; all this just because political figures said that's what's happening, so it must be true. But she's a well-read journalist and here she is trying to convince us that what they are saying is untrue. She mentions that the news, whether Internet, radio talk shows, or newspaper, we look at to hear about the debate is mostly conservative. I take that as a conspiracy of opposition towards conservatives (not to mention that fact that Palin is a conservative). There is plenty of liberal centered media that share information with their own bias or twist. People are not just paying attention to conservative based media. Overall Rubin may be correct. Shared biased opinions are definitely being taken as facts.
Summary: As debates are recently being played out, one question comes to mind: "Could a conspiracy culture take root here?" (Rubin). In Pakistan and the Middle East public views are being spread by conspiracy theories. If it is printed in the newspaper it must be true no matter how outlandish. After the 9/11 attack some believed that it was carried out by Jews. A couple of Saudi graduate students believed it to be true and confirmed it with Rubin, as well as a leading journalist in Pakistan; keep in mind these are educated people. Because their news is broadcasting this theory, they believe it to be true. So thank heavens that's not happening in the United States, right? Wrong, as we read our newspapers, watch news stations, and read blogs we've come to see how easily we are convinced that an opinion is fact. So what are the facts and will we ever get them? Yes, but not often; "Brave journalists who try to write truth are risking their livelihood, or their lives" (Rubin). Richard Hofstadter was one such journalist in 1964. He wrote about the anti-Masonic movement, the anti-Catholic movement, the theories on a conspiracy of international bankers, race, and more. But even with such writers things have changed drastically because of the Internet. We go on news websites and ideological websites and count that as fact. "Unverified opinions, rumors, and emotions are served up in lieu of facts, but are often accepted as gospel" (Rubin). On the subject of health care, one could read a blog about how our new president stirs up trouble and rage in citizens over the matter, and that's why people are against it. It is taken as a fact and with all these opinions going around it makes it a perfect place for conspiracy theories to begin. With the Internet spreading information so quickly it makes a wide audience have the ability to read and believe such statements and opinions. "I have seen how a conspiracy culture distorts politics in the Middle East and Pakistan. Believe me, you don't want that here" (Rubin).
Response: I agree with Trudy Rubin that many times the American public will take opinion as fact. We are shown this through commercials; because one celebrity we like says they use this kind of acne care, we believe that it is the most effective and we buy and use the product. But that is either staged or just that celebrity's opinion. We hear it through the news and journalists, those very people we trust to give us the events that we personally can not see, and we believe them. Many times those events are told through opinions, but its hazed over as if what we are being told is a fact. So are their conspiracy theories? I personally don't believe there are and won't until literally proved there are. In some ways I wonder if Rubin is a little hypocritcal. For example, Obama's government single payer health plan could very well lead to rationed health care, expecially to the elderly. It appears to have done so in Great Britain and in Canada. She mentioned a lot in her article that Sarah Palin and Sen. Chuck Grassley made untrue claims about Obama's health care ideas that convinced some of the public to be against it by refering to potential decisions to withhold highly expensive medocal care from the aged as "death panels" ; all this just because political figures said that's what's happening, so it must be true. But she's a well-read journalist and here she is trying to convince us that what they are saying is untrue. She mentions that the news, whether Internet, radio talk shows, or newspaper, we look at to hear about the debate is mostly conservative. I take that as a conspiracy of opposition towards conservatives (not to mention that fact that Palin is a conservative). There is plenty of liberal centered media that share information with their own bias or twist. People are not just paying attention to conservative based media. Overall Rubin may be correct. Shared biased opinions are definitely being taken as facts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)