Well, now. Where to start?
We all know there is a gap between the news we’re allowed to read/see at the moment and the news we need to know about. My concern is that this is politically-motivated and it seems this is not well covered in the article. If it isn’t covered in the book, that’s a real shame, because it is seriously affecting the way people think.
For example: David Cameron knows he can’t win an election without keeping Rupert Murdoch’s news empire on his side; that’s why he has bent over backwards to be Rupert’s puppy. Conversely, the BBC has its Royal Charter coming up for renewal soon, and fears what the Tories will do – so IT is bending over backwards to be Cameron’s puppy.
Result: The vast majority of news in the UK is slanted in favour of the Conservative Party, no matter whether that organisation’s policies are right or wrong. And we haven’t even discussed the output of the Daily Mail or Daily Telegraph yet!
For the better part of the last century, the media landscape was governed by a basic information asymmetry and the journalistic logic of control over content. As a result, mainstream news organizations were in a leading market position to decide which news reached the audience. While the public has always displayed differing levels of interest in stories the media provide, the classic and linear twentieth century format of news delivery exposed the public to more content than what it preferred.
View original post 969 more words