The media indirectly rules the world

The media grip on opinion and perception all over the world is one of the wonders of the modern world. That power if placed in the wrong hands becomes a lethal weapon when the media manages to eliminate entirely from its media all objectivity and dissent, when the media makes sure that voices of dissent are either blacked out or marginalised, while known apostates of the national consensus are either demonised or trivialised. In theory different viewpoints should be allowed to be heard , those of the learned, unlearned, those for or against and even those of the disinterested, all should be aired or written down by the media but theory is not practice in most media homes. Of course it is possible for any citizen with time to spare and a canny eye to work out what is actually going on but for the many there is no time, and the network news is the only news even though it may not be news at all but only a series of flashing fictions intended, like the avowed commercials, to manipulate viewers opinions and perceptions. The media is in strict charge of what the people should and should not know. They ask the questions during election time, in other words they determine what the politicians may talk about at election time, that famed agenda that never includes enough detail that can help viewers make a 100% informed decision about the right candidate to vote for. If we are not careful the media will impose a President on us as they manipulate our opinion and perception. Rarely are voices other than those of the media heard so some viewers will never know if there are any other viewpoints besides the ones the media chooses to air or write about. If that is not the media ruling the world indirectly I don't know what is.

Nothing appears more surprising to those who consider human affairs with a philosophical eye than the easiness with which the many are governed by the few and the implicit submission with which men resign their own sentiments and passions to those of their rulers. When we inquire by what means this wonder is effected, we shall find that the governors have nothing to support them but opinion and perception of the people which they manipulate through the media. Therefore can we safely conclude that media plays a great role in ruling a nation and this fact applies to both the most despotic military governments as well as to the most free and popular governments. If that is not the media ruling the world indirectly I don't know what is.

An example of a country where the media practically shapes the minds of its viewers is none other than the powerful USA. What has never ceased to amaze me about the USA media is the fact that at any one time it always has some nation or foreign leader to demonise. In almost every case, their overwhelming commitment to freedom, democracy and human rights is to be applauded but I have always wondered what they would do without an enemy to demonise. I bet they would probably cut down their veiwing time by half or the content in their newspaper publications would decrease by half. First the USA media was obsessed with demonising Russia and communism and rightfully so but when Mikhail Gorbachev spoke at the UN on December 7, 1988 that Russia was unilaterally disarming and going to be pro-democracy the media had to quickly install a new demon to replace Russia. The Arabs began to be thoroughly demonised by the Israel lobby while the Chinese where somewhat nervously demonised by elements of the corporate state. But neither could do as a long-term devil because the Arabs have too much oil that the USA needs while the Chinese give a lot of money to USA as loans to enable the USA to sustain the luxurious high lifestyle that is beyond its means that it is used to. Then September 11 happened and the media was given a good reason to switch to demonising Afghanistan and soon after Iraq also became a target with allegations that it owns weapons of mass destruction being used to justify its attack.
The big question I want to ask is this, does this demonising by the media ever cause the demonised nations or leaders to change their ways or it simply makes them go on the defensive and actually become the demons that they are potrayed to be by the media. It's about time the media starts ruling the world with love and not by demonising undesirable elements. Love showered to the undesirable elements after reasoning with them will have the psychological effect of making them want to act in loving ways. If only the media would adopt this love strategy, they would heal the world and make it a haven of peace, love and happiness.

Let me digress a bit and talk about Zimbabwe. This media issue somehow reminds me of some Zimbabwean bloggers on Afrigator who concentrated on blogging about the disharmony and limbo situation in Zimbabwe only and who therefore found themselves bankrupt of ideas to blog about when Tsvangirai decided to form a unity government with Mugabe. Some of them then decided to hold on to the unresolved issue about Jestina Mukoko the peace activist who is still in jail for an MDC cause, a reason that they think should have stopped the unity government from being formed. Economic and political progress of a whole nation full of cholera, hunger and economic collapse victims stopped because of a few activists, that would be rather unreasonable don't you think so. I am sure if these activists are really true activists in the sense of the word activist and we were to ask them if the formation of the coalition government should continue with them in jail they would say yes go ahead because being an activist is all about sacrificing your life for the greater good. Most Zimbabweas have chosen to live the matter in the hands of the law for the sake of progress in the nation and we are hoping that with the coalition government in place the courts will practise true justice. In the meantime as the coalition government is formed let us press for the jailed activists' rights to medical attention.