The Media is NOT the Message
With all due respect to Marshall McLuhan: "the Media is" Really NOT "the message."
I was first introduced to Mr. McLuhan as a Junior or Senior at the University of Texas. The name of the class was 20th Century Literature and Electronic Media. Rumors ran rampant about the class; and, being of somewhat sound mind and body, I decided to sign up.
The class size was probably two to three hundred. The auditorium was always full. The professors, Mr. and Mrs. Kruppa, were, by any standard, unique professors. The class title bore little resemblance to Literature, or Electronic Media. Face it, in 1969, Electronic Media was in its infancy. Pagers, beepers, the Beatles?
At any rate, one of the authors we studied was Marshall McLuhan. We debated and discussed "Understanding Media, the Extensions of Man" for most of the semester. Every Tuesday and Thursday, we would also entertain a fellow student's "final exam." Most presentations resembled cheap "R" rated home-made movies, or interpretations of dance, music and life. It was, to say the least, a unique look into literature, media studies, and an easy "A" or "B."
Mr. Mcluhan died in 1980 at the age of 69. According to his web-site: https://www.marshallmcluhanspeaks.com/about/index.html, he was the "first major communications theorist of how the new media have the power to transform nature."
Mr. McLuhan's message and insight into the media was prophetic. If you haven't heard of Mr. McLuhan, I strongly suggest you widen your horizons by reading his works.
The "Media," and I use that term very, very loosely, has transformed media. Like Hollywood, media exists to promote media.
People in the "media" have won Pulitzer Prizes for reporting lies. Historically, when one lies, and is caught, there are consequences. You remember George Washington and the cherry tree. He supposedly told the truth. Mom and dad didn't scold Georgie because he told the truth.
You can now legally lie to your heart's content, so long as you misspoke. remembered incorrectly, or were taken out of context.
Today, truth is irrelevant because truth doesn't support the agendas of big business, the media moguls, politicians, political parties or uneducated individuals.
Pulitzer Prizes now rank up there with "Oscars." They make good bookends, or so I'm told.
If we are speaking about the news media, then we are now looking at a new conundrum. By reporting "news" without supporting proof, is it really "news?"
Which leads me to this final thought: Why would I want to gather information from some industry that clearly lies, is biased, and has no interest in reporting the news or telling the truth?