Science, Technology And The Nightly News Essay

In his essay “But Enough about You” Brian Williams addresses a very interesting issue about the user- generated media and the Mainstream media in today's society. He believes that the ideal American culture has changed because people are only concerned about themselves. Nowadays people are more interested to watch news if the implied message involves them or if it's good enough to tell someone else. Williams explains how all the new devices, the web, video and the digital cable fill a perceived people need. Therefore, many people are not interesting in reading newspaper or watching news in which it leads the Media to lose viewers. He emphasizes that the audiences that follows the news report are dropped, but the media still work hard to gathering

These news outlets, as well as talk radio, at least get people involved in the political world and drive conversations. Many who watch or listen to them have other sources from which to gather information, such as their local newspaper. For every disparaging remark made about my choice of news outlets, I can find 10 more to counter the remark anywhere on the web. For example, Rush Limbaugh said that Bartlett has now gone over to “the dark side.” Another example is from The Christian Science Monitor, “Fox News was among the top four outlets cited as people’s main source of news.” For a 19 year old actively involved and working college student, I do not have the time to find and read scholarly papers because any and all elections would be over by the time I did. In the meantime, I will continue to listen more to the news radio and read news websites while discerning what is actually news and what part is for entertainment

In chapter 2 of The Filter Bubble by Eli Pariser, after discussing how although two newspapers still create the base of almost all news stories that get shared online, newspapers are failing daily. He then explains how news became centered around “public opinion” instead of just information about the outside world. Pariser reminds us that:

It is important that news sources provide facts because not only does that allow viewers to choose a side, but it also informs him/her about what is going on. An individual should not have to search for the truth; every source should give both sides of a story. Each individual should be able to find the truth in a single source. Since this is not the case, viewers are having to look for the truth. Watching the news on the television mostly shows only one side of the story and the sources do not pay attention to other opinions which makes the viewer stick to that belief as well. However, in today’s generation, most individuals do not rely on television for the news. These individuals utilize electronic devices to find out about recents news. The viewers hear or read about different perspectives and are able to decide what they agree with and disagree

Sometimes careless science publishing can weaken the public’s confidence in science and the government. The Media is enormously powerful and leading and will influence people’s opinions on everything. There are plenty of stories in the media that will change the public’s perception of science or even make them see a new perception. Sometimes these stories are just written to scare the public into believing a certain thing just so they can sell their stories.

The reflection period out of this conversation was for me shocking. As an engaged political person, I at least try to be engaged with the news. I find that CBS and New York Times are the most reliable news corporation out there with little to no bias at all, all facts. However, my colleagues find that the current mainstream news media are becoming either gossip, tabloid, or fake news channels. Respectively, I take offense to their beliefs on the basis that the news today is fake. Throughout history, it has been the news and investigative journalism that led to the many stories that transformed this nation into many shapes and forms. Without the news, a society will be at worst an anarchist society where nobody trusts each other or a tyrannical society where the populace will fall for anything that the state displays. It has been an American right of having open news sources, do Americans want to disregard this right in favor of being handed a silver platter of information from bias sources? Anyways, going back to

The popularity of television developed in the 1950’s, but the power of television as a medium secured its place in the 1960’s. This is demonstrated statistically in a Roper research poll aimed to investigate American television habits and related attitudes (Small 12). Adult participants were asked how they received most of their news about world current events and were then given options including television, newspapers, magazines or radio. In 1959, 57% identified newspapers over television; by 1969, television had taken the lead as the preferred source as stated by 64% of individuals (13). Participants were also asked which source they would be more inclined to believe if they experienced conflicting reports of the same news story. In the 1959 poll, the results showed television slightly behind newspapers, but the 1969 responses showed an increase of 44% choosing television as a more trusted source over 21% identifying newspapers. Again, the enchantment with television was revealed when more than half of the respondents identified TV as the option most likely to keep if forced to choose between the four previously mentioned mediums (13). The changes exhibited over a decade reveal the public’s budding dependence on television broadcast news.

Despite the fact that television is still the dominant source, there have been shifts involving the consumption of news programming. There has been a significant fall in the reliance of the networks and their national newscasts for America's news. Today more people are relying on the reports given by local news programs than on that of the networks. Several surveys have recorded this shift as early as 1993, denoting that much of America cites local news on television as their major source of information.

With all the bad science in the media the general public is often confused as to which are the correct choices. Educating the public to be better consumers of science would improve general health and lower the need for access to healthcare (Pincus, Esther, DeWalt, & Callahan 1998).

According to research obtained by Cornell University scientists, 92% of Americans watch TV, 87% read newspapers, and 81% specifically watch local or national televised news stations…

Scientific sensationalism does not just water down the conversation surrounding important issues, it can make them dangerous. Because democracies hinge on an informed public, with increasing amounts of sensationalism, this public may be desensitized to genuinely alarming scientific discoveries because the have become acclimated to attention grabbing headlines

This research has been conducted due to the fact that some researchers have claimed that “journalism is dying” whilst others have argued that “journalism is not dying but is simply evolving” (Blatchford: 2014). This has been a much contested debate triggered by the decline of news circulation from traditional news sources i.e. newspapers, television and radio together with the technological advances of the internet and social media (Cub Reporters: 2010). This has raised many questions and firstly, this dissertation will assess whether the rise of social media has led to the decline of news circulation from traditional news sources. Secondly, this paper will look at what the advantages and disadvantages of using social media as a news distributor are for professional journalists and the general public. Lastly, this study aims to investigate

Does the United States of America actually get the media it deserves? This is a crucial question for not only U.S. citizens to be asking themselves, but the media personnel as well. If a country’s media is not efficiently and effectively providing its citizens with news stories, there is a huge problem at hand. While the media thrives off of breaking news stories, it’s generally the minute details that grab the attention of viewers. In essence, the minute details are what makes a breaking news story a truly breaking news story. If the media withholds certain details from a story, which happens daily, they are depriving the viewers of “real news.” Due to this, American citizens often times do not get the news they deserve.

Science is an important part of our every day lives. We wake up each morning because we hear the ringing of our alarm clocks and turn on our faucets to wash our faces with warm water. We turn on the lights in our rooms to see our clothes and get dressed and we put our breakfast in the toaster and sip coffee from our mugs. All these things we do in the short time we are rushing to get ready for work or school, are due to the advancement of science and technology.

To wholly have a grasp on how this new founded approach to journalism has changed alongside technology—as well as understanding the dangers such openness brings forth—one has to understand what exactly those changes are. Primarily, those that are writing for the sake of offering information have, whether willingly or not, fed into the usage of social media as it has become a centralized method of distribution that is relatively inescapable with the current times. As such those framing the news for the masses find an authentic avenue to stay in contact via social media that has benefits ranging from, “its extraordinary newsgathering potential; its potential as a new tool to engage the audience; and as a way of distributing our news” (Eltringham, 2012), all of which are deeply different from the presentation of reporting that occurred during earlier eras. Days of strongly structured instances of journalism that could not travel with such speed have been replaced as, “social media has trashed many of the foundations on