It makes me think back of using the right language for the audience. In any news story I’ve ever seen, there’s always been a certain vocabulary in circulation. Even with their “experts,” there never really has been a sophisticated enough vocabulary to make comprehension a problem even when the subject might be something purely scientific. On the same note, they don’t use simple minded kindergarten sentences. Each phrase is meant to carry some depressing, tragic, or cute and comical tone with it. Most of these slants are difficult to pick up if you’re below a certain age. This is all generalizing, but with especially biased sources the language may especially change from an obscure bump of the knuckles to a terrorist fist jab depending on the audience. What I found the most interesting in this article, which was also brought to my attention in a class last year that focused on the mass media, is the usage of previously filed information from past events. When we first entered Iraq some of the most recurrent pictures shown were from the Gulf War. Many of the clips on the news have minute labels claiming to be on file taping from whatever footage the casters gleaned. It’s all a show of images and pessimistic events that don’t actually inform you of anything more than every single rape, murder, and natural disaster going on in your backyard. Generally speaking, it’s the boring tails of the boyscout who saved the old lady from the on coming bus that get stuck on the back burner, because realistically if you run a tv slot from 5-6 and don’t have footage of the boy in action who cares?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment