A Flawed And Detached Media...

I am often baffled how the media can turn on a dime. Things are doom and gloom one minute, and the next, sunshine and lollipops. This morning I saw a headline that stated 'CAN BUNDLING SAVE STREAMING" Last year, headlines were blurting out how cinema was on the ropes and that it had been beaten by streaming. Now, what is being imposed on streaming is reality. The cheap money that flowed into programming budgets has evaporated. Interestingly, the media often engages in a perpetual pile racing towards gloom or unrealistic puffery.

Many people work in analyzing the business of motion pictures with skill and a wise outlook. I personally deeply respect the opinions and perceptions of Patrick Von Sychowski,, John Sullivan, and Rob Arthur. These folks' perceptions are balanced and forward-looking, and they seek to grow this industry. Many others expound on this industry and often make perfect sense; others rapidly ensure their readers understand they have a dime's depth. Unfortunately, editors often relegate stories to the woefully uneducated.

Even more dangerous for this business are the pundits and analysts who firmly embrace a culture of lying that is becoming pervasive in our society. At the core of the problems is that business, government, and the media are in a never-ending cycle of manipulation.

The news media and the government are entwined in a vicious circle of mutual manipulation, mythmaking, and self-interest. Reporters need crises to bring drama to the presenting of news, Journalists need crises to dramatize the news, and businesses and governments need to appear to be addressing these crises. Often all these parties engage in duplicity, and as the cycle grows, they need more reliance on the truth. Within business, government, and the media, this pattern of behavior leads increasingly to a high degree of ineffectualness. Credibility diminishes, and the cycle of lies must often be increased to sustain themselves.

It was sometimes different. At one time, the media was federally mandated to adhere to the Fairness Doctrine. This was an action enforced by the Federal Communications Council and had its origins in 1949 the same ye, the same year as the Paramount Decree. The government was apprehensive that with the rise of the three extensive television networks, the public's access to balanced reporting with have become limited.

The Fairness Doctrine firmly insisted the networks devote significant time to issues of profound public importance and time to contrasting views on issues of public importance. Congress ratified the policy in 1954, and by the 1970s, the FCC called the doctrine the "single most important requirement of operation in the public interest." If a broadcaster did not toe the line, they were threatened with the non-renewal of their broadcast license. The SNL Skit Point Counter Point lampooned broadcasters' attempts to appear very even-handed in the eyes of the ever-looming FCC,

IT held the broadcasters in line. The doctrine was the law of the land until the Ragan administration removed the doctrine in 1985. Then, in 1985, The FCC released a report the Fairness Doctrine hurt the public interest and hindered free speech rights guaranteed by the First Amendment.

Congress attempted to remove the FCC decision and make the Fairness Doctrine Law and not just a rule of the FCC. The law was passed, and Reagan summarily vetoed it. Pandora's box was opened.

This has a slow descent of the role of media and the movies. Movie criticism has become an increasingly tepid affair. From the glory days of Paulina Kael, Janet Maslin, and Roger Ebert to today has dramatically declined. At one time, a critic would advance an opinion of a movie that promotes thought, sometimes controversy, and a publicity generator to today when most reviewers are cynical surfers, sound bytes, and schoolyard purveyors of negativity. As a result, most of today's criticism needs more substance.

Journalism around movies has flattened. The business reporters take one issue, ignore the historical patterns and take giant leaps in assumptions. For the record, movie-going is here to stay, but it will change. There is a sense of distraction in the media about movies. They arbitrarily will join a tsunami of opposing opinions.

Take the instance of Disney's "John Carter" a decade after its release. It is still referred to as a gigantic misstep by the studio. The marketing department at Disney screwed the pooch on this picture and was ably aided by a cadre of limp critics. Some critics called out Disney and told the public this was not a bad little movie. The movie is doing well on streaming and often appears in Netflix's top ten. Made on a budget of $250 million, "John Carter" made only $30 million on its opening weekend.

The failure of Disney's marketing, coupled with a lack of media engagement and subsequent bullying by the media, all added to this herculean failure. The lack of influential media and a distracted focus is causing the exhibition business to lose millions in both offices; Our society is disconnecting from the media because they no longer trust it.

Reversing the trend of an under-media-engaged public has become a real problem in our society. A population that is all capable of critical thought is imperative. It is imperative to present an unbiased view of our society. The profound need for an educated populace cannot be understated. Once to can rebuild intelligent media dialog, you can re-ignite a passion for the movies.