Impact of mass media on society

For centuries mass media has played an integral role in people's lives, and still is. It has helped link the world closer together and allow more people to better informed of the news happening around the world. Although the mass media is supposed to neutrally serve as a platform to disseminate information, the complexity of the world these days make impartiality and transparency of information almost impossible.

On a surface level, a journalist's main job is to write out and present all the information they have managed to retrieve and discover. However, it doesn't exactly work this way in today's context. What journalists are permitted to write are actually limited by both the corporation, and in some countries, the government as well. Inevitably, for the sake of their own job security, they have to conform to these bodies. The human instinct to look after one's own need first come into play on this occasion, where the journalists rather do things that will keep their jobs secure than doing a good job of their own, since doing a good job for this case doesn't necessarily produce positive responses from their heads. For this, we can't exactly blame them for the deviated information that may be published, but just simply map out the complications in mass media that lead to distortion of information.

What impact does mass media have on the society today then? I would like to think that it has everything to do with the information takers, in other words, people who read the news. One has to be very clear about the neutrality of the article, and possesses the ability to evaluate and discern the information given. In fact, these are skills taught in General Paper and I am actually practising that approach in writing this post.

Anyway, back to the topic, the impacts. Generally, my point is that the impacts of mass media would ultimately be positive if the reader knows how to interprete information intellectually. If any piece of news published is twisted, a good reader would be able to distinguish it from the actual truth. People who fail to read rationally often get deviated from the truth, sad to say, due to the difficult circumstances of the journalists.

Of course, even the wittiest of readers may fail to pick up some logical errors. It's not exactly the readers' fault as the journalist's linguistic ability may occasionally overrun the reader's wit. This is when mass media can really be harmful.

If that happens, I have to say, it will still be better if the media is controlled by the government. Although this means that the news published would usually side the government, at least we are well aware of the controller's intentions. Although many people are critical of the fact that the newspapers in Singapore never publish articles that are against the government, we do have to note that this actually leads to a degree of stability here. Stability of a country is largely dependent on its political stability, something that we can say is achieved in Singapore. If newspapers were to publish articles that criticise and slam the government, this may unnecessarily raise the citizens' ill-feelings towards the government and raise tension in the country. There would be an increased friction between the citizens and the government, and opposition parties would take this opportunity to take charge of this situation. This all in all result in instability in the country, something anyone would last want as a consequence of mass media.

In a nutshell, we can look at mass media at different angles, in both a positive and negative light. In any case, I feel that as long as the country is safe and well, a slightly and inevitably perverse media can be pardoned.