Mass media consumes all, the world of politics, news reporting and celebrity are now merely aspects of media enterntainment. The lines are blurred to the point where seperating the three proves almost impossible. Richard Madeley defends Blair on The Daily Politics, Simon Cowell pitches an X-Factor style poltical show, Geri Haliwell is a frikkin UN Ambassador. With multi-platform mass media there is no single trusted source, and on the internet there is no gatekeeper at all, meaning often contradictory and plain innacurate information is available to all. Are these simply fake for the purpose of satire, or something more sinister? How are we to distinguish? And more importantly, does it matter?
I think satire is basically taking up the position of where investigative journalism was in the 70s and 80s. In many instances, its the only source of stories from either outside of the mainstream, or that are critical of the media establishment. Look at the sucesses of the Daily Show and Colbert Report in the US, or Charlie Brooker's programmes over here. Satirists' outsider status allows for a window into the otherwise closed-off world of politics and institutionalised news reporting, and by using humour they can afford themselves an audience who would not be interested otherwise. The disconnect between the political system and the everyman in the UK is highlighted superbly by the fact that we have no equivalent satirical nightly TV show like the Daily Show, or late night talk show like Leno, or online satirical souce like The Onion. I would argue that these unimportant things are important however, as in a world dominated by incredibly unimportant things, these unimportant things are significantly less unimportant, and even have the potential to become very important indeed.Can things like this which we spend so much time on be so very unimportant???


3Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks




Reply With Quote


Bookmarks