POLITICAL MANIPULATION VIA TELEVISION NEWS (methodology analysis)

 

Introduction

Since television news provides a channel to reach a wider audience, manipulation due to propaganda has resulted in a lack of political autonomy.   Media, including television, offers interpretative narratives to interpersonal discussions prerequisite to shaping an understanding of political reality.  However, due to political pressures, pervasive news manipulation is used to change the dynamics of the political landscape.  Television has a deleterious effect on the credibility of information that shapes a different political perspective on individuals. In other words, the concept of tabloidization connotes populous politics, which people follow with curiosity.

 Methodology

There is a use of a case study to help to understand the manipulation of politics using television. With the case study method, there is a critical evaluation of the tabloidization concept of television. Precisely, the concept indicates the results of the television commercialized by the pressure of the advertisers with an appetite to reach wider audiences. Notably, a television in the political space not only gives sound news but also vision. Therefore, it is easier to use these channels to manipulate people to form a certain political stand due to the assumption that pictures are more objective than sounds (Cengiz et al., 2019).  Political news in television discussions is more intense and has various interpretations.  However, the tabloidization concept decreases the attention given to political news and focus on areas that are easy to manipulate, for example, politicians' individual lives.

To further develop the concept of political manipulation through media, there is the use of theories of media mass. Most of the theories of mass media predict the impact of media on society and societal issues, while few predict its effect when there is interference from a third party. Within the framework of the public-interest theory, private media are profit-driven incentives; therefore embark on issues that generate profit instead of informing the masses, while state-controlled media rectify these shortcomings.  Some critical theorists and neo-Marxist writers are afraid of the concentration of media in the private hands; furthermore argue that market-based media can lead to improper control of society by wealthy individuals to the disadvantage of those who are poor (Bagdikian, 1990).  These market-based media can be a channel to create populous politics to influence a particular political landscape.  The second theory is the ‘liberal democratic’ theory of media, rooted in the idea that free speech is imperative to the sustainability of the plurality of public opinions.  A free press is a fertile ground for democratic liberalism hence a robust civil society (Curran et al., 2018). In situations where there is no free press, there is the prevalent use of television to spread political propaganda without having the liberty to challenge the ideas. The third theory is the public choice theory which conforms to the concentration of information provided only to a few people (Djankov et al., 2013). In a nutshell, though television is the public choice approach, individuals in political power are the source of political information. Furthermore, the theory argues that when the state has significant control of the media, there is a high possibility of abuse of this power.

References

Bagdikian, B. H. (1990). The media monopoly. Thirth edition.

 

Cengiz, G., & Arvas, N. (2019). Manipulationoftelevisionnewsanditseffectsondemoc-racy.

Curran, J., & Seaton, J. (2018). Power without responsibility: press, broadcasting and the internet in Britain. Routledge.

 

Djankov, S., McLiesh, C., Nenova, T., & Shleifer, A. (2003). Who owns the media?. The Journal of Law and Economics, 46(2), 341-382.