The Mass Media and Politics

There are several artists that have used and are using music as their political voice. Them doing this I think is ok, it is a way to express their political opinions. I think the problem comes in where they think that their opinion is what most people are actually thinking and just wont say. In some cases yes this is true, but that isnt the whole picture. There are many people that support this war….but do you hear songs being played on the radio that are in support of the war? Let me answer that, NO! I obviously was not alive in the 60’s, I dont know what it was like then, but today I get the feeling that the public is split two ways, the ones that actually have an opinion (whether it be for or against) and then there is a large majority that do not give a shit. The music industry and the media combined are to blame for this.

Here is an example…

Toby Keith (a country music artist) released a song called Courtesy of the Red, White, and Blue (The Angry American). Here is the chorus so you can get the feel.

          Hey Uncle Sam put your name at the top of his list,
        And the Statue of Liberty started shaking her fist.
        And the eagle will fly,
        And there’s gonna be Hell,
        When you hear Mother Freedom start ringing her bell!
        And it’ll feel like the whole wide world is raining down on you…
        Brought to you courtesy of the Red, White and Blue!

The song is pretty much saying put your camo on, get your gun, and lets kick some ass. Actually in the song he sings, ” ‘Cuz we’ll put a boot in your ass. It’s the American way.” The media freaked out! They report on how this is not a good way to look at America and putting you boot in someone’s ass is not the “American” way. Toby also got a lot of slack from fellow country singers. To name one, the Dixie Chicks. The lead singer publicly said Keith was ignorant.  This feud between them went on for sometime and the media covered it closely. If you want to read about it, go here http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/6-5-2003-41299.asp  The part of this controversy that bothered me the most is that the media and music industry missed the whole point. They were so concerned about the artists feuding that the song was not taken for its true value. He released the song to promote patriotism and to get the American people, not necessarily to support the war, but to support the soldiers that are dieing so that people can sit over here and fight about whether the conservatite Toby Keith or the liberal Dixie Chicks is right.

Later the Dixie Chicks release their own political song bashing Bush and government as a whole. Do you see the Dixie Chicks getting on a plan to Iraq to perform for the soldiers like so many others are, no. The Dixie Chicks, in my opinion, have the same problem that a lot of the American people do. They like to bitch and not do anything about it. Instead of doing something to support what they believe in they are complaining, except their complaining is public and costing thousands of dollars. Stop bitching and start a revolution! thats all I have to say about that.

So, to my point. Music artists and the media are essentially doing the same things, giving the people soft news or entertainment. Songs of the 60’s were sang to motivate people to stand up for what they believe in and do something, kind of motivational. Political songs today are not used for this, they are used to entertain not inform and motivate. It seems to me that music and media are both headed dont the same dark path.

More and more there seems to be a lot of media outlets reported soft new apposed to hard news. The questions I have are why and is this a good or bad thing.

 First, I will try to answer why there is more soft news then ever before. This has a lot to do with the viewers and what they want to see. If I remember correctly from a Political Psychology class that I took, Matthew Baum wrote on soft news bringing foreign policy to the public. In his writings he suggested that people look for soft news because they want to be entertained and not necessarily to be informed. Also, he said that the people who want to be entertained are not going to be the ones to actually seek the hard facts about politics. This is understandable, people come home from work or school and they want to sit down and just relax, most do not want to sit down, watch a show and think analytically about what they are watching. The networks are simply following what the public is wanting. Soft news draws much more viewers then serious news, so the networks deliver the entertainment that is wanted. You cant blame them this is a business, the more people watch, the better the chances are that they stay on the air.

Secondly, is this a good or bad thing? Well, I would have to stay both. I think the public getting there political news from late night comics is bad for the simple fact that the subjects joked about might not be a joking matter. The events talked about, or made fun of, are not always something that should be taken light heartedly. Political news is something that should be taken seriously because it effects everyone whether they think is does or not. However, I would have to say that it is a good thing because people are at least being informed in some manor about the events that are taking place. Like Baum said people want to be entertained while at the same time being informed.

So the real question…is soft news a friend or a foe? I would say Friend, a sometimes annoying friend that you just cant seem to get away from, but nevertheless a friend. And I think this friend is here for the long haul.