Monday, September 22, 2014

CamPAINing


Has anyone ever realized that there are specific guidelines for how to broadcast any political campaign? I sure didn’t know until getting curious how politicians begin their campaigns on the television.



According to this manual explaining all of the terms and conditions to broadcasting a campaign one of the first things is the duty to the public. They are supposed to make sure that the public are informed of any topics related to the election, including information on the parties, candidates and voting process. Yet another guideline is the duty to impartiality. This guideline is clearly blurred, and I’m sure it is an intentional moment of impaired vision.

These guidelines are supposed to keep the airing of elections and campaigns unbiased and non-discriminatory, however they don’t seem to do so.  Do you believe, based on any elections you’ve seen broadcasted, that even one of these guidelines are followed?

Please look at the link below for all of the guidelines. A few of the major ones that caught my eye were:

Guideline 2: Duty of Balance and Impartiality
Publicly owned or funded media have a duty to be balanced and impartial in their election reporting and not to discriminate against any political party or candidate. 



Guideline 8: News Coverage
Publicly owned or funded media should be particularly scrupulous in complying with their obligations of balance and impartiality in their news and current affairs reporting

 

Guideline 12: Opinion Polls and Election Projections
If a broadcaster publishes the results of an opinion poll or election projection, it should strive to report the results fairly.

 


http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CI/CI/pdf/guidelines_for_election_broadcasting_en.pdf

Left Winged Broadcasts



When I was young I remember using the internet very briefly and always seeing the MSN website pop up before my eyes right as I opened the browser. Had I known I could change the homepage to myspace, or whatever I was currently into at the time, I probably would have, but that isn’t my point. My point is that MSN and MSNBC have changed their entire look, or my perception of them has changed with time and maturity.

Looking at some of the major Left Winged broadcasts MSNBC was one of the first things to pop up on my search for studies and accusations.

According to the Huffington Post MSNBC was accused of biased coverage over the coverage in Israel they provided.


The writer was accused of covering the Israel side more than the Palestinian side of the current situation. According to an Italian and Israeli citizen a radio station broadcast very little air-time for the Palestinian side and more than substantive time for the Israeli side of the debate.


The show was later cancelled for unknown circumstances, perhaps related to this biased coverage? Do you think a major broadcast company like MSNBC should have cancelled the show after being accused of the biased reporting, if that was the reason it was cancelled?

Right Winged Broadcasts



If you’ve grown up in a Republican and/or conservative household I’m sure you’ve seen Fox News on the screen many times, perhaps all night sometimes.

According to a study done by Pew Research there are several factors that show Fox News has an extremely biased product. According to Pew’s study over 60% of Fox News watchers identify themselves as conservatives. It would be natural to lean towards what the majority of your audience prefers, however is that the point of media?

Wasn’t the purpose of a news broadcast to relay information and “news” not press political bills and voters?

To top off the uneven statistics Fox News actually costs more than other news broadcasts, but it’s audience still continues to pay the extra. Do you think that is something that would be necessary if news broadcasts weren’t biased? Although research shows Fox News outspends all of it’s competitors for various funds and running expenses wouldn’t this seem a little strange if you were asked to pay 50 cents more for the same candy bar, but this one had a red wrapper instead of a blue wrapper?

Take a look at the Pew Research Study yourself here: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/01/14/five-facts-about-fox-news/


What do you think about it?

Banned Television

Sitting at home this weekend I decided to watch some Netflix. Like many people my age I enjoy the humor of Family Guy. I saw something that caught my eye and ended up watching the 200th episode that was a documentary about the entire series. Something in that episode caught my interest.



We all know that Family Guy, amongst other adult cartoons, brush against many controversial topics using humor. However we may not have known there are several missing episodes that were not allowed to air. Including one on abortion, they were told they were not allowed to debut this episode due to the fact that it was too controversial. Family Guy has long been a source for comedy in politics and common dilemmas people face in daily life. Why censor some of their episodes? Does this idea that items seen as too controversial need to be banned fit the needs of their audience?

Below is a link to the Wikipage that explains some information on the episode. Do you think it is too controversial to air? Do you believe that the Fox Network banned it to maintain a certain political persona?

According to the FCC all obscene media is prohibited at all times of air. They have a list of three topics that all criteria must meet before being aired. You can look at their items in more detail at their website below.

    An average person, applying contemporary community standards, must find that the material, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;
    The material must depict or describe, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable law; and
    The material, taken as a whole, must lack serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.




http://www.fcc.gov/guides/obscenity-indecency-and-profanity