Media, Politics and the Editors Decision

Media, Politics and the Editors Decision.

I personally tend not to read newspapers or watch the news anymore because as times gone on I’ve started to realise how much of the media is controlled and influenced by politics. It’s a case of either being left wing, with newspapers such as The Guardian, Daily Mirror and the Daily Star.  Then you have right wing newspapers such as, Daily Mail, The Telegraph and The Sun.

I came across a good and slightly humorous description of the newspapers and their targeted audience on yahoo answers:

 "The Times is read by the people who run the country.
The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country.
The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country.
The Morning Star is read by the people who think the country ought to be run by another country.
The Independent is read by people who don't know who runs the country but are sure they're doing it wrong.
The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country.
The Financial Times is read by the people who own the country.
The Daily Express is read by the people who think the country ought to be run as it used to be run.
The Daily Telegraph is read by the people who still think it is their country.
The Sun's readers don't care who runs the country providing she has big ****.
The Sport is read by the people who think that Elvis is running the country from his secret lunar bunker assisted by a team of topless aliens. "

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20120715153441AA2mWT8

Of course depending on what type of paper it is and which audience its aimed at is always going to effect the content of the ‘news’ paper. To me it seems that most of these publications go out of their way to slander each other (left wing Vs right wing) and to prompt propaganda that is going to benefit them. Of course the editor’s decision has a huge part to play in this because they dictate what we see and what we don’t. I think this debate strongly links to the debate of truth in photography, because it is the editor’s final decision on what gets published.

I think a very strong example of how politics pretty much run and influence the media is when Rupert Murdoch started to take over British newspapers like, The Times/The Sunday Times, the Sun and News of the World, the content of the papers changed greatly. For instance, Don McCullin was one of the staff photographers who worked with The Times and the type of images he used to take was a true representation of what was going on in the world, his images were raw and extremely over whelming but still informative and raised awareness of the tragedy in the world. But when Murdoch took over he completely changed the image of the paper from being a serious and informative news publication to one that was filled with less important news and  celebrity gossip because he wanted the paper to be more light hearted.

Rupert Murdoch made a point to back politicians during election times if he thought they had a chance of winning, so he would purposefully help to promote them and to paint their opponent in a negative light, of course this is going to affect the voting public’s choice on who they end up voting for.  A prime example of this is that he had formed a very close relationship with Margaret Thatcher and during the 1992 general election he helped John Major to win the election by helping to promote him in his newspapers and slander the opposition. So I think it is safe to confirm how much of an effect politicians have on the media and news, they just use it as a tool for gaining power and for controlling what the general public sees.

With regards to politics and the media, a good example of this is of Kim Jong Un, the political leader of North Korea, when his uncle Jang Song-Taek fell out of favour with the leader, Kim Jong Un had him photo-shopped out of many images in papers and a documentary that had already aired on TV in North Korea, which was re-aired with the updated version without Song-Taek in, not long after Kim Jong Un had his uncle executed and supposedly fed to 120 dogs! Again this shows how much power Politian’s have over the media where they can just cover things up and control what the public are allowed to see and aren’t! I mean surely politicians shouldn’t have the right to be able to have images edited that have already been released?

My conclusion on media, politics and the editor’s decision is that in this day and age, we have to really look for the truth because it’s not going to be in the newspapers on sale in shops anymore. The day has gone where the things we read about what was going on in the world wasn’t so hugely influenced by politicians and the easily swayed editors in charge of publications. Even the images we see can’t be trusted much because they literally have the power and authority to sensor certain imagery as well edit. I think their main agenda is to manipulate what we see and read to further their propaganda for power, money and their ‘right’ to involve their selves in other countries affairs which in fact usually leads to war till they get what they want.