08-03-2024, 03:33 PM
I find myself befuddled by the repetition in the text. Perhaps a review of the text is in order.
Ultimately, I do concur that there is a base disconnect with what the media does, and what the 'consumers' of media presuppose... as in, most people believe that the media presents "truth"... others "fact," and others, "personally-motivated opinion."
But much of this dialogue hinges on political 'flavors' which I believe is part of the problem. "Apples and oranges," so to speak. If we assume that there is full truth in the idea that the narratives and expositions of "news" media is a result of "artificially narrowed" perspectives... we should ask, in my opinion, how does that happen? "Who" or "what" has the ability to narrow the argument before the argument is presented. It would imply that it is not a phenomenon, as we would like to believe, but a 'construct' which has a design - implying an author of the façade.
Ultimately, I do concur that there is a base disconnect with what the media does, and what the 'consumers' of media presuppose... as in, most people believe that the media presents "truth"... others "fact," and others, "personally-motivated opinion."
But much of this dialogue hinges on political 'flavors' which I believe is part of the problem. "Apples and oranges," so to speak. If we assume that there is full truth in the idea that the narratives and expositions of "news" media is a result of "artificially narrowed" perspectives... we should ask, in my opinion, how does that happen? "Who" or "what" has the ability to narrow the argument before the argument is presented. It would imply that it is not a phenomenon, as we would like to believe, but a 'construct' which has a design - implying an author of the façade.
