While we are on the subject of media/new media, here’s an interesting account of legacy mainstream media (LMSM) spin on an issue unrelated to the ID controversy – US immigration policy.*
The chosen example merely shows that LMSM can slant any controversy as long as everyone who has a say on the news desk is absolutely convinced about who the winners will ultimately be.
In LMSM, such stories usually get framed as a black and white morality play. On the ID issue, for example, doubts about Darwinism – of whatever kind – are treated like this: Bad or irrelevant “religion” attempts takeover of good and useful “science.”
Okay, so go be a profane, beer-swilling unbeliever somewhere if you like. But if you dare to wonder whether school kids should be told some of the textbook stretchers and fudgies, you are one disloyal bunny. It’s bad enough that you even know that the books are full of stretchers and fudgies , where Darwinism is concerned.
Next thing we hear, you will be handling diamondback sidewinders for Jesus way down deep in some East Carolina swamp** …. Hey, you read your fate here first.
This situation is not new. Doubts about Freudianism were routinely framed, years ago, as evidence of psychological problems, and doubts about Marxist economics were not tolerated from people who ate macaroni and cheese in order to pay off a mortgage. There is no middle ground or alternative viewpoint in a morality play.
What’s new is the challenge created by the new media, which empower alternative viewpoints like no other has ever done. To see why, consider what, precisely, is changing.
The blogosphere, the Web, and e-mail have undermined the newsgathering function of major media as such. They are not needed the way they used to be. Read More ›