Communication
1. How do you think that the lack of billboards affects a state′s economy? Do you think that billboards have that much of an impact on the economic vitality of a
state? 2.Your reading clearly describes social responsibility theory. In terms of the definition and explanation about this theory, do you believe that this actually
represents the media (and its responsibility) in our country? Why or why not? (Answer in few Lines) And comment on this——- I do not believe that the social
responsibilty theory is accurately representative of media in our country; while the theory sets standards for how the system should work, it is exactly that–a
theory–and nothing more. My biggest issue is with the following: ″setting high standards of professionalism, truth, accuracy, and objectivity″ (Baran 366).
Unfortunately, I do not see media living up to this. Political media, as just one example, is unprofessional in that candidates bash each other, accusing their
opponents of all sorts of misconduct. Commercials for cereals, candies, and other consumable products, as another example, only offer nutritional information when it
is to their advantage–there are no label laws or regulations on the use of words like ″natural,″ ″organic,″ ″fresh,″ etc. Jon White in a previous week discussed how
news outlets are biased, an example of how media is not objective. All of these lead to my problem with the final point our book makes about the theory, ″media
professionals should be accountable to society.″ 3.As you know from your readings for this week, media freedom and regulation can be a balancing act. What is your
attitude about the first amendment and media freedom? Do you believe that the news media should be able to broadcast or publish any type of story? What are the
boundaries, if any?(Answer in few lines) And comment on this——— My personal attitude toward the first amendment in relation to media freedom allows the media to
release whatever they like if they are willing to stand by it. While I believe that there should be some sort of laws and regulations specifically for media to somehow
prevent defamation, I know that this is next to impossible. The media should just be aware when they publish something that they are responsible for the drawback of
such a release should it be untrue; by publishing libel, that media outlet is tarnishing their own reputation and it is up to us as the public to stay informed and
decide for ourselves which magazine/newspapers we want to read and shows/broadcasts we want to watch and listen to.
