The Center for Media and Democracy was founded in 1983 by John Stauber. Stauber ran Center for Media and Democracy for 16 years until July 2009 when Lisa Graves took over. The Center is a non-partisan, independent, non-profit organization that aims to sift through the different motives and manipulations plaguing today’s media and give only the facts. According to the Web site, the organization aims to: investigate and counter spin by corporations, industries and government agencies; inform and assist grassroots action that promotes public health, economic justice, ecological sustainability, human rights and democratic principles; advance transparency and media literacy to help people recognize the forces that shape the information they receive and promote open content to help all citizens “be the media”.
The Center for Media and Democracy publishes SourceWatch, an online encyclopedia similar to Wikipedia about issues, groups and people that effect the public agenda. It publishes PRWatch, Fake TV News and Weekly Spin, which gives information about the outside forces that manipulate the news. It also performs original investigations involving misinformation, supports public education campaigns, and staffs the PR Watchdog Resource Center, which answers questions from journalists and the public. The Center has also produced at six books about a range of topics.
The Center’s Web site gives viewers access to Sourcewatch, the encyclopedia, and their projects, some which are also listed under Sourcewatch. Others have their own adjacent Web site of their own. The projects include: Climate change, coal issues, nuclear issues and tobacco. The Web site also gives access to the different reporters who cover the different topics of interest.The main page of the Web site gives an variety of recent news stories from the different projects and reporters.
Fake TV News, which is under the Publications tab on the Center’s Website, is a 2006 report by the Center. The Center tracked 36 video news releases to see how TV stations used them as not only news but news that has been gathered by their own reporters. KOKH- 25, the Fox News syndicate in Oklahoma City, aired six of the video news releases, five of them in their entirety. KOKH-25 was the top offender in the report.
This Web site could be helpful to journalists, but I found it would be more helpful to the public. The Center for Media and Democracy aims the news stories at the public, not at journalists. I think the publications help point out the inconsistencies and wrongdoings of journalists and their organizations. Again, the Web site is aimed at educating and protecting the public.
I would give the site a 3. The current events on the homepage have been frequently updated, but many of the publications are out of date. Sourcewatch has an extensive database of names, groups and events but the information under each entry is lacking. There is a great wealth of information on the Website, information that citizens should be educated in. Journalists are citizens too and this site could be a jumping off point for good story ideas. However, as far as a resource for journalists, the Web site was lacking.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that this Web site is geared more toward regular citizens rather than journalists. However, journalists can possibly still look at the outside forces that manipulate the news in order to change the situation. It may take only one journalist at a news organization to take an ethical standpoint and change these wrongdoings and inconsistencies happening in the business. Unlike some of the other sites we have been discussing all semester, it seems like this site had more news and fact content compared to others. This would be a really good site for journalists looking for story ideas without dealing with partisan information to get in the way of the truth.
ReplyDeleteI think journalists could use this site as a 'what not to do' tool to help their reporting and packaging skills. Journalists could also find out how the audience perceives the news they are offering and adjust to make the product better. Learning about Fox 25 was interesting, as well as the Fake TV News content. This shows that journalists must always verify their information to stay credible, and it's sad that Fox 25 is failing at that value. I agree that there are many story ideas on this site, but, learning from KOKH, journalists must still check and verify because this is a form of social media, where any and everything can be published. I think the site offers a lot of news and fact fact content as Heather commented, but I personally wouldn't stay on the Web site for long because of most of the out of date publications. However, if I wasn't one of the want-my-news-like-fast-food Internet users, I agree that I would be able to find good, useful content and learn from the information.
ReplyDeleteI definitely see each point you all make and I completely agree. I think that the Fake TV News is pretty unbelievable.. no pun intended. Its amazing to see so many stations manipulate and put their own perspectives in this story. Heather I completely agree with you and I think that it is possible for someone to change many of the inconsistencies that are being shown in news today. I think that aspects of the web site should be a lesson to journalists! However, I don't really like the layout... I thought it was just a little too much but overall it does have some good content and I agree with the rating Kristi gave it.
ReplyDelete