It's alarming, to say the least, what people can get away with saying without being challenged, especially when it comes to pertinent issues. The public relies on the media, to a certain extent, to present factual evidence in order to make informed decisions.
What was most surprising to me was the lack of cross-examination whenever one of the politicians made a claim. What was needed was a judge not a mediator. No one pressed the issue or asked tough questions when it was most needed. It is hard to pick out one instance in the clip because it happened throughout the entire segment. You couldn't get away with that in a court of law so why is it acceptable that politicians be given a pass when it comes to discussing health care, gun control, and other government policies. If anything these are the issues we need the most debate on.
The lack of follow-through renders the news corporation useless because it goes against the service it is suppose to provide, which is to educate. I pulled nothing of value from the clips except what a hollow network CNN really is. In the end though it is the fault of the viewers. If the public advocated for a more formal debate and a less argumentative forum we would have some intelligent dialogue. Most people would rather watch people yelling at each other than get informed, which is why shows like the O'Reilly factor dominate the ratings.
1 comment:
It is very clear that CNN isn't capable of committing themselves to intellectual debates. What examples could you provide to prove your point on how CNN is a "hollow network"? Also, what is the O'Reilly factor? Could you explain a bit what it is and how it relates?
Post a Comment