the reality of The world, which is described in the media, that's true, more rarely, in the real reality, writes Staffan Dopping, and Stig-Björn Ljunggren, in his op-ed piece.
There is, unfortunately, true. It has the greatest impact. The impact röstbeteende, social activism, and, not least, the trust of the community. This leads the politicians to conduct themselves in accordance with the logic of the control of the media content, and to make it more enjoyable. ”We jamsar by”, which is one of the politiksfären put it on. The debate has thus focused on a simple, concrete, dramatic and emotional rather than what is serious and what is important. Medielogiken has given rise to a polarization, which will be all the more destructive the longer it lasts.
The strange thing is that the Dopping and jan johansen doesn't want to be any part of the responsibilities of the media and their medielogik. They want to put all the responsibility on the citizens themselves. They advise them to become good journalists, ”to seek a variety of sources and perspectives in order to create his or her own view of the real world.” They seem to accept the fact that the media has become a part of the entertainment industry. Actually, it seems that the most frequently reported: ”most Likely, it is easier to medieträna the audience, other than to suggest that the media produces a different content than in the present.
the big maktutredningen (the Power of the idea in 1990), and in the main the democracy commission considers (the Media's integrity, 2005), it was medielogiken as a problem of democracy. Medielogiken is pushing this to be more entertaining, the undermining of the media's integrity.
that does not say that all the media is just as dumb, and all of the journalism trade-distorting; it is a shining example.
the Media did not take to heart the messages of the work. Most people still seem to not care, despite the fact that the trust is on the decline, with a few exceptions in the past year.
since I wrote in my pamphlet ”Understanding medielogiken” in 2014, I found depressing: ”Likely to be needed for a demokratikrasch for there to be a willingness to deal with the sagomallen, and, therefore, medielogiken”. (The word sagomallen is designed furthermore that it creates medielogiken.)
today, we are closer to a possible demokratikrasch than in 2014. We are seeing a tremendous backlash from the people against the elites, including the media, are perceived to be present. We see the politicians who exploit the people's rage in order to show to the media and destroy the confidence of those have to go.
on the Contrary, it has become all the more important that the media reflects the views of its strategic options – in particular, the fact that they run a straight course in the entertainment industry, and thus opened the way for the questioning of the privileges of the media in order to be able to carry out their democratic duty.
Herewith is not to say that the media is just as dumb, and all of the journalism trade-distorting; it is a shining example. It is hereby not said, that there is something wrong with the education of the people in the medielogik, like Dopping, and Ljunggren suggest. It is also needed.<