Criminal cases seize too many spaces in the media. The audience has a morbid interest, but is it good? The easiest way for a nobody to be somebody is to kill somebody. This is well-known among nutcases, from what I've read. There's something wrong with that. The media should make an attempt not to dwell upon trivia and negativity. They do exert an influence upon the reader's opinions and beliefs. On my blog, I try to avoid discussing criminal cases and sex scandals. Such topics receive more than adequate exposure on other blogs.
Many conservatives I have spoken with express a cynical view of human nature. They assume that everyone is motivated only by selfish interests. They are reluctant to accept benevolent motives in others, because it conflicts with their theory of human nature. They have a pronounced fear of crime. They purchase handguns for their personal protection. They believe that people will do evil whenever they can get away with it. The creators of South Park express such a view. I believe that the media encourages their point of view by dwelling upon crime and other negative and unpleasant matters.
The millions who live in a decent manner, work hard and do what's right are not reported, but live their lives in anonymity. Why are they worth any less verbiage? They should be reported too, upheld as examples for others to follow. In fact, the coverage ratio of decent people versus psychos should be 10,000:1, or equal to their actual representation in the general population. Today, the ratio almost seems to favor psychos.
I think human nature is open to amelioration and that is why I am a liberal. With education, progress, and successive generations, it was possible for Europe to evolve from the Dark Ages to what it is today, which is grand and splendid, the envy of everyone throughout the world. But I spend more time reading about history and science than I do reading the media.
No comments:
Post a Comment