Impact of mainstream media on perception of events

Abstract
The media has a pivotal part to play in giving the public information on what occurs worldwide, especially in areas wherein audiences lack direct experience or knowledge. In this paper, the effect of media on the formation of public attitudes and beliefs and its association with social change will be examined. The paper will draw on diverse empirical research findings and assess media coverage influence in areas like disability, economic growth and climate change. These findings will offer insights into how media shapes public discourse as regards establishing agendas and making the masses concentrate on specific topics. With regard to the issue of disability, for instance, a link has been established between hardened attitudes towards the disabled and negative coverage by media channels of those availing themselves of disability benefit. Additionally, it has been discovered that media channels severely restrict information for audiences to understand such issues, with alternative resolutions of political issues conveniently removed from the public discussion platform. Other evidence has also emerged on how media coverage may limit the understanding of social change - related possibilities. In a research on climate change - related news reporting, media construction of uncertainties surrounding the subject has been addressed, besides how this results in disengagement relative to potential personal behavioral modification. Lastly, the paper will address policy and communications - related implications and how new as well as conventional media vehicles contribute to more informed public discussion development.
Background
Media channels, including the TV, internet and the press, contribute significantly to informing the masses of things going on across the globe. People belonging to areas lacking direct experience or knowledge rely particularly on media vehicles for information. Mainstream media forms the key to agenda establishment and making the masses concentrate on specific issues, limiting the scope of perspectives and arguments informing public discussion. This digital media age has revealed that our world comprises of a corpus of disjointed, circulating, typically conflicting information. Mass media vehicles have traditionally allowed effective information flow between the diverse societal groups, systematically editing and interpreting the body of information and making sense of this world for people. Specific areas of knowledge given precedence over others, being effectively accorded the privilege of being correct, reliable and trustworthy. With regard to shaping content, it may be argued that numerous privileged entities (e.g., lobbyists, public relations sector, political and social institutions, etc.) play a part in producing media accounts. These diverse entities intersect and influence problems open to debate. However, the outcome may seriously restrict audiences’ information access. After all, the media has the potential to effectively remove certain subjects from the public discussion. Hence, media content analysis – what information is divulged and what isn’t – is a matter of great concern (Happer & Philo, 2013).
Content analysis
This research approach is founded on the theory that all controversial areas are characterized by conflicting means of giving explanations for occurrences and their associated history. They are linked, typically, with diverse political stands and may be considered ideological when they are related to legitimating means of understanding their connection with social interests. Thus, ideology (an interest - related outlook) and groups’ legitimacy struggle are closely related. While news, at times, seems like a chaotic debate and information flow, it is supported by major assumptions concerning societal linkages and how one must understand them. Lying at its core is beliefs on motivations, responsibility, implication, and cause - effect. Therefore, news reports on refugees may have many things to assume on the above subjects. Such a qualitative approach entails in - depth evaluations of important explanatory topics in news headlines and text. Hence, with regard to the Palestine - Israel issue (Philo & Berry, 2011), for instance, the research discovered that content analysis of a total of 89 news reports displayed only seventeen lines of writing from transcribed reports dealing with the conflict’s history. Journalists using the term ‘occupied’ failed to explain that it is a military occupation, causing certain audience groups to erroneously believe Palestinians were ‘occupiers’, as they were residing in the disputed territory (Happer & Philo, 2013).
Media reactions to the 2008 financial crisis and its consequences demonstrate how contradictory ideologies fight for legitimacy. The crisis’s main instigator was: global banks gave loans of large sums to the inflated American, British and European property markets, typically to individuals and organizations without the capacity of repaying them. Disproportionate bonuses and profit - seeking goals implied deals were pushed through, overlooking associated risks. Mainstream media reporting on the crash showed coverage of individuals typically drawn from or highly supportive of the system that created the issue in the first place discussing solutions. UK’s mainstream press, however, reflected audiences’ anger (several individuals perceived a threat to their savings and pensions at that time) (Happer & Philo, 2013).
The research has revealed how ideological battles connected to powerful societal groups shape public debate. Audiences do not receive such messages uniformly, and their level of influence is highly variable. A 2011 research by the Glasgow University Media Group, on the United Kingdom’s disabled and disability - related beliefs, attitudes and news coverage (Briant et al., 2011) revealed a significant growth in print media reports of disability across sample periods; however, this growth was supplemented by a change in how disability was reported. The topic became more politicized, with fewer articles sympathetically describing disabled persons; on the other hand, articles revolving around disability benefit - related fraud increased. In this regard, evidence was found that media coverage, together with logical processes (that defrauding the system had become easy and, thus, likely) and claims of specific case - related information lead to the creation of certain beliefs revolving around fraud and disability. On the whole, the British mainstream media has accorded scant room to views outside of those that the major political parties offer. With regard to the 2008 financial crisis, the array of responses decreased to the option of cutting now (the present coalition government’s recommendation), or cutting later (a Labour party recommendation). These limited options apparently impacted public insights into the need for cutbacks. Successive polls revealed most people support even welfare - related cuts (Happer & Philo, 2013).
Conclusion
The information media reports give the public may legitimize powerful entities’ actions as well as facilitate collective change, in addition to limiting and influencing individual behaviors crucial to broader societal change. Thus, the link between worldviews and the public’s political conclusions, between political actions and conclusions, and between conclusions and societal and individual behavioral modification commitments, must be examined. The research has revealed that media channels are a facilitator – they ease through policy action through repeating and reinforcing messages, in addition to potentially influencing behaviour, particularly if these are related to other structural support forms.
References
Briant, E., Philo, G., & Watson, N. (2011). Bad news for disabled people: How the newspapers are reporting disability (Report). Retrieved 4 July 2018 from https://www.gla.ac.uk/media/media_214917_en.pdf
Happer, C., & Philo, G. (2013). The role of the media in the construction of public belief and social change. Journal of social and political psychology, 1(1), 321-336.
Philo, G., & Berry, M. (2011). More bad news from Israel. London, United Kingdom: Pluto Press.