Does The Media Lead Or Follow Public Sentiment?

[Methinkshe]

I've read several posts and articles that susbscribe to the view of an irresponsible media as good as initiating a HPC. I don't buy it. The media picks up on public sentiment and follows it, but I do not believe that the media can initiate a change in public sentiment. At the worst, media attention will highlight and possibly exacerbate, but I think it is incorrect to blame the media for causing a HPC or even a turn of sentiment. What does anyone else think?

[IP Newcomer]

I've read several posts and articles that susbscribe to the view of an irresponsible media as good as initiating a HPC. I don't buy it. The media picks up on public sentiment and follows it, but I do not believe that the media can initiate a change in public sentiment. At the worst, media attention will highlight and possibly exacerbate, but I think it is incorrect to blame the media for causing a HPC or even a turn of sentiment. What does anyone else think?

I agree. I think that far too much time is spent by people complaining about what's on the front page when it's all just there to sell newspapers. You can't make profits by providing what your consumers don't want, and most newspapers make a profit.

[enrieb]

Here are a few documentaries and films that explain how the media work, who owns them and and who's benefit's. This first link is a short clip about 'concision' in the media and how it limits debate by only allowing for the broadcast of conventional thoughts and widely accepted believed truths(myths) eg. 'House prices only go up'

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2...h&plindex=0

This next documentary is a must watch, its a fantastic piece of work, and shows the beginning of the rise the of media as a form of social control that can influence and direct public sentiment. It shows its roots in the ideas of Sigmund Freuds theories on the subconsciouses mind that were taken and used by his nephew Edward Bernays who coined the phrase 'Public Relations' as he felt the term 'propaganda' was a negative label. Bernays was one of the first to attempt to manipulate public opinion using the psychology of the subconscious.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays

The Century of the Self part 1

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2637635365191428174

The Trap part 1

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=83...h&plindex=0

OutFoxed: Rupert Murdoch's war on Journalism

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=67...h&plindex=0

Manufacturing Consent

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5...h&plindex=0

[microbe]

The media is not interested in news at all.

They are interested in stories. Madeleine McCann is a story, all the other children who have suffered similar fates throughout the world aren't, apparently.

All the want is an enticing headline accompanied with a photo, the rest is incidental.

A story doesn't have to be true, or real, all it has to do is help sell the advertising that pays the bills.

The BBC is, if anything, worse. Devoid of real reporting or investigation, posturing and posing and pointless, anodyne snippets.

Edited December 9, 2007 by microbe

[Mr Nice]

While I do think that the media have a pretty big role in ramping up HPI, and will probably have one in any crash, I think it's reality that ultimately guides what the people do.

when they can find that they can borrow %100 LTV with no deposit, and resell the property for %20 more the next year, they do it, and you have HPI.

once they call the bank to MEW a mortgage and the bank laughs and says no, HPCs set in.

[oracle]

I've read several posts and articles that susbscribe to the view of an irresponsible media as good as initiating a HPC. I don't buy it. The media picks up on public sentiment and follows it, but I do not believe that the media can initiate a change in public sentiment. At the worst, media attention will highlight and possibly exacerbate, but I think it is incorrect to blame the media for causing a HPC or even a turn of sentiment. What does anyone else think?

Truth of the matter is the media both leads AND follows.

The media is required to initiate and stimulate demand for product X.

once a fashion is created,the media can "guide" people to follow it with some reactive programmes...ie property porn.

This cuts both ways,when the crop has well and truly harvested,the media can then be employed to pour a bit of petrol and accelerate the process of stubble burning.The bigwigs at the top know the game,and WANT violent swings in prices,both up and down.If there was such a thing as a stable market they could not make money.

[The Masked Tulip]

A friend of mine is a journalist.

A friend of his, who is an EA, wanted to sell her house a few months ago for an outrageously inflated price.

The journalist wrote an article about houses in that particular town and that particular area being much in demand, short in supply and how house prices there were soaring.

The article appeared in a national newspaper.

[VacantPossession]

The media is literally bombarded with corporate PR. The flow of corporate hype is so plentiful and so relentless that much of what is printed or broadcast is simply a verbatim regurgitation of PR hype rather than news. This easy flow which requires no actual work on the part of journalists has led to the wholesale crushing of real news under the weight of corpo-spin. There is almost no such thing as an "independent" survey, and most surveys presented as factual news on TV and radio are a completely unchallenged orgy of corporate publicity.

So I do not think the media is reflecting public sentiment, it is reflecting CORPORATE sentiment and bending to an overt manipulation of facts which are nevertheless presented as independent news.

I've said this before but it's worth saying again: The only currently available rag that has no political, corporate or pressure group allegiance is Private Eye. They do occasionally get things wrong, but even then they actually get a lot right but can't necessarily prove it. Private Eye has by itself consistently exposed the greatest number of important examples of hypocracy, political corruption and corporate excess in the last 40 years. The conventional press then picks up on the Eye's work and makes it their own. There is an impressive and long list of Eye hit jobs that have brought down governments and nuked corruption, amongst which are:

Poulson/Maudling

Profumo/MacMillan

Daily Mirror Pensions/Maxwell

Jeremy Thorpe/Liberals

Tory Sleeze

Labour Cash for Honours

PFI scams

NHI Scandals

Miscarriages of Justice (too numerous to list)

Gibralter Shootings

Menezes Shooting

Guildford 4

Birmingham 6

Sleeze within journalism

Share scams

City corruption

VP

Edited December 9, 2007 by VacantPossession

[oracle]

A friend of mine is a journalist.

A friend of his, who is an EA, wanted to sell her house a few months ago for an outrageously inflated price.

The journalist wrote an article about houses in that particular town and that particular area being much in demand, short in supply and how house prices there were soaring.

The article appeared in a national newspaper.

it does stimulate demand.

why do you think Ballrooms have had a surge in membership of late??...could it be just even remotely possible Strictly come dancing had something to do with it???