Is Paris News Media Manipulation?

Given the incredible amount of recent news media coverage of Paris Hilton's Jail sentence, then release, then back to Jail. I was curious if some of you get the feeling that there is an attempt to manipulate the public interests in the news. I'd like to open a discussion into the possibilities here.

Please this is not a venue to discuss the Paris Hilton case, there are several threads in BelowTopSecret.com forums open for discussion of that topic.

Many had similar suspicions some time ago when the Anna Nichole Smith case dominated the news for weeks on end. And there have been other cases in the past where major local, national and international news were all but ignored by the media in the USA when celebrities do something silly, like Britney shaving her head, or being seen in public not wearing underwear. Why are these things so important that they are the top news throughout the media coverage? I am sure I could cite a multitude of similar stories in the news like the recent Paris fiasco, that were thrust forward in the news to take dominance over all other news. However that would be redundant and unnecessary, as you all already know of them, possibly way more than you should.

As a society are we that interested in these stories?

Or are we being sucked into these non-event items because the news media spoon feeds it to us as very important when it is clearly not?

Is it possible that the media is being manipulated in order to divert public attention away from more serious, national, and even global news?

There seems to be dual affects, some people get sucked into these non-event stories, and can't seem to get enough, and others just avoid it all together, it is possible that both serve an agenda successfully.

Is the news media being manipulated?

Are we being manipulated?

A combination of both?

None of the above?

Please share your thoughts, opinions and information.

Great topic !

I think it comes down to pop-culture sells advertising.

The almighty dollar trumps real news every time.

I guess I could dig deeper, find out which corporations get the
lion's share of advertising profit and find out what agenda's
they have.

But, I really think it is all about the benjamins.

Regards,
Lex

[. . .]

Is it possible that the media is being manipulated in order to divert public attention away from more serious, national, and even global news?

I think so. I thought something similar may be happenning here, when a story about the trial of the last Australian detainee in Gitmo was eclipsed in the Australian media by first, the retirement of an Australian Olympic swimmer, then, by a website rumour of steroid use, by the same swimmer. These both occured at the same time that major developments regarding the case were announced. It pushed the Hicks case from the front page.

How is the G8 going? All I can hear is a bunch of drunk dudes and a screaming girl, calling for her mommy. . .??




[edit on 10-6-2007 by fingapointa]

These events are only covered heavily in the mass media IMO. The mass media outlets are losing viewers by the day just because of the non-stop coverage of stories like this. I know very few people that get their news from TV or newspapers anymore, as they all take a mainstream view of everything. I don't have a problem with mass media outlets covering stories like this without end, it just brings more people over to the alternative media and gets them looking for real news.

Here I the UK the god awful Big Brother and all the associated news coverage that goes with has come round again.

Vast chunks of air time are set aside for people to watch some slightly kooky people locked in a house, and then there is hours of analysis, news papers will dig through their lives for mundane information, 'something' will inevitably happen that will hit the news in a big way - its the same thing every year, and If you haven't had enough of that they will probably do another celebrity version.

That’s not the end of it either; there are a number of other similar programs (survivor, castaway I'm a celebrity get me out of here and more)

If the objective is to spawn a generation of zombies with nothing constructive to ponder on in their spare time they may be succeeding.

Originally posted by Now_Then
That’s not the end of it either; there are a number of other similar programs (survivor, castaway I'm a celebrity get me out of here and more)

So would you say that television, and news media are intentionally using programs and non-event news like this to distract people away from more important issues, or to create apathy?

Perhaps such manipulation could have the result of slowly eliminating critical and free thinking?

Being led, following, a sponge?

Originally posted by UM_Gazz
Perhaps such manipulation could have the result of slowly eliminating critical and free thinking?

Hit the nail on the head - well in as much as people who choose to watch this tat choose to join a herd of zombies.

I think your original point, you used Paris as an example, is a bit more subversive. People have to watch the articles on that sort of thing before they get to the bit of the news worth watching (usually just the weather)

Originally posted by UM_Gazz
So would you say that television, and news media are intentionally using programs and non-event news like this to distract people away from more important issues, or to create apathy?

Possibly. That, or to simply keep them glued to the tube so the viewer doesn't miss out on being told what to wear, buy, do ... believe.

 

Originally posted by 12m8keall2c
Possibly. That, or to simply keep them glued to the tube so the viewer doesn't miss out on being told what to wear, buy, do ... believe.

Believe?

Are you suggesting that a person's beliefs can be changed by the media at large?

Do?

Does this mean that some could be driven by power of suggestion to "do" things via the media at large?

No doubt it can be used to persuade people to buy things, after all that is what commercial television, print, radio, and even a great deal of the Internet is all about.

Are we witnessing a modern communications era that can be (if not already) used to control a vast portion of the public?

Could there be a time in the future where critical and free thinking will be much more rare as the majority tend to follow the lead or top mass media presentations, or are we already there?

As I see it, there are only two real groups of substance out there in the world. The Controllers and The Free Thinkers.

The Controllers want to drug the masses, to dull them into unquestioning obedience, and to do this they have the power of vast amounts of money. They use that money, mostly milked from the 'induced buyers', to not only sell more worthless crap, but to keep the level of real thought at as low a level as possible.

The Free Thinkers, swimming in a sea of ambivalence, try to awaken the Normals, and therefore sway them over to the Free Thinker camp. The Free Thinkers lack the power of the mass media but do control a large portion of the cyber world.

It is an undeclared war, and no one can know yet which faction will win.

Just my take on it.

Believe ... as in what to believe, what they believe regarding any given situation, circumstance, or occurence being fed them via the boob box.

Do I think the media, in all forms, is or has the potential to form, shape and mold public opinion? Certainly.

Are they aware of such and or do they exploit that capability? Certainly.

Is that capability constantly being researched, refined and improved upon? Certainly.

Do ... as in what to purchase, how to dress, what's hot and what's not. Does the media have the capability to influence such? Absolutely, and I firmly believe it utilizes that capability in much the same fashion as I have stated above.

Are we witnessing a modern communications era that can be (if not already) used to control a vast portion of the public?

Undoubtedly. In my opinion, the only question is to what extent does that capability exist, and how actively are they [all] seeking to further said control/influence.

Could there be a time in the future where critical and free thinking will be much more rare as the majority tend to follow the lead or top mass media presentations, or are we already there?

Hell, UM_Gazz, while I realize it didn't start with the advent of television, I do feel it's been on a downward spiral ever since, and ssemingly gaining speed with each new tecnological advancement.

Why think for one's self when you can have someone else do it for you?

The Rothschild quote comes to mind. [paraphrased] "Grant me control of a nation's monies and I care not who makes the laws."

Personally, you give me Any level of control or influence over a nation's minds and Hell ... you can keep the damn money. It'll find it's way home eventually.



 

Originally posted by NGC2736
The Free Thinkers, swimming in a sea of ambivalence, try to awaken the Normals, and therefore sway them over to the Free Thinker camp. The Free Thinkers lack the power of the mass media but do control a large portion of the cyber world.

I just had to quote that.

Rarely do I read something that really strikes deep, and stays. The above is one of those rarities.

To anyone, the next time you've completed a session in front of your television, as a consumer of what the media has provided you, without opportunity to interact or question, when you turn it off, and have a moment to think to yourselves, search your own minds, and try to determine what if anything of value you gained. See what stands out in your memory, and what tends to fade, and ultimately what if any effect anything you've taken in had on your thoughts for that day.

Can you be shaped, swayed, indeed led?

Um_Gazz, thank you for the kind words. I am glad when people find something of value in my words.

I try to express myself in a way that is not the regurgitated communication that passes for thought in this day and age.

I have yet to call anyone, deserving or not, a "sheeple". Not only is it poor grammer, but it is so overused that it has no impact value. Those who cannot have and express original thoughts are of small value in the deeper discussions.

Too often, people watch TV or read, but fail to reflect on the matter. They don't turn it over in their minds and try to study it the way you would an unusual rock or a leaf. Because they only glance at things, mentally, they form very shallow thoughts. Great ideas require deep water to ever float.

Just my opinion.

You know, I didn't know anything about what is going on with Paris Hilton until I read this thread which is really ironic because the threads position is in favor of not advertising Paris Hilton's situation :0

What I'm saying is that, by talking about how we should not talk about something. We are actually ending up talking about the very thing we don't want people to talk about in the first place.

A paradox.

[edit on 10-6-2007 by selfless]

what we are seeing is the extremities of negative liberty. No common interest, and the lack of political and economical goals.

Give the people what they want.

Can some of the older people remember the news in the 80's and early 90's it was all doom and gloom.

The media goes through cycles just like everything.

Sooner or later it will shift back to a more neutral state.

But only when the people want it.

Originally posted by tombangelta

But only when the people want it.

If that be the case tom, then I'd have to say just write it off as another "thing of the past".

While I do agree with the premise that the media is only showing what the Audience has "asked for", I also have to give thought to the posssibility that past efforts have proven successful in creating those "requests".

To "sell" something, all one need do is to create and or incite a perceived need for such. ?

 

[edit: to add]
Remember the days when rolls of duct tape and plastic sheathing were typically Sold Out, out of stock? Why was that? Hardly lack of production. no?

 


[edit on 10-6-2007 by 12m8keall2c]

Originally posted by UM_Gazz
Is the news media being manipulated?

Are we being manipulated?

A combination of both?

None of the above?

Please share your thoughts, opinions and information.

no, it's just stupidity and capitalism. news about paris hilton makes $$$$$
$$$$$ is the goal of the media

paris hilton = $$$$$
$$$$$ = good for business
news about paris hilton = good for business

it's so sadly simple

Maybe it could be a way to see weed out the people who are sucked into the media stories from the others who will try and find the important stories instead of watching Paris? Split the public up into those two groups?

I'm not sure how that would help anyone or anything like that, just a thought.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul

no, it's just stupidity and capitalism. news about paris hilton makes $$$$$
$$$$$ is the goal of the media

The dumbing down of the populations is the most efficient aspect of good business for them.

News about Paris Hilton has the purpose to dumb down the populations.

I've often heard the news referred to as an 'Entertainment Program'.
I get most of my news from the forums that I visit online. If I watch the TV News, all I get to see is Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, etc, and while my fiance loves hearing about it, and then telling me "the Goss", I frankly, couldn't care less.

It's no secret that the Media today are dumbing down the population with stories about celebrities, and ducks on a pond (whoop-dee-do), ect, but I honestly don't know whether they are being pushed into it by the powers that be, or the sheep that they call viewers.