|

If Trump Is A Crazy President Media Isn’t Any Better And Needs To Do Some Soul Searching Of Their Own

Globalization has changed the role of the media. The means of communication and transportation have developed to a point where the whole world has become one unit. Anything happening in any corner of the world becomes immediately available to the media everywhere. This has given the media tremendous power which it did not have before.

By Dr. Sawraj Singh

Media is not very happy with the way President Donald J. Trump has treated it. However, this is an opportunity for the media to do some much needed introspection. Why is President Trump unhappy with the media? He feels that the media is biased against him.                                                                                               Globalization has changed the role of the media. The means of communication and transportation have developed to a point where the whole world has become one unit. Anything happening in any corner of the world becomes immediately available to the media everywhere. This has given the media tremendous power which it did not have before.

It will be no exaggeration to say that the media has become very powerful and in a way has risen above the geographical and political boundaries. However, this increased power and technological advancement have not necessarily improved the quality of coverage or has led to higher ethics. The situation is very much like what globalization has done in general. Growth in the means of communication and transportation has physically globalized the world. However, it lacks a true global perspective. Therefore, the present globalization is economic only globalization which completely lacks an ethical aspect.                                                                                                                                                                                   I can give my own example on how I reacted to the media coverage of the election. When I watched the TV debates between Trump and Hillary, I was not a supporter of the either candidate.  However, I was appalled to see the media openly supporting Hillary and was trying to put Trump down. At least to me, Trump appeared to be a victim of the media and was like an underdog. My natural inclination is to sympathize with the victim and the underdog. Moreover, Hillary appeared to be the candidate of the establishment while Trump looked like an anti establishment candidate.                                                                        I felt that the Middle America was going to rally behind Trump because they were going to support a candidate which they perceive as an anti establishment. The Middle America feels itself victimized by the establishment. Therefore, they could very easily identify with Trump. This phenomenon would give him an edge in the election. Based on this I predicted that Trump would win the election. However, the media, including the New York Times, were giving Hillary more than 90% odds of winning the election. This did not make any sense to me. I was wondering how could the media be so sure of Hillary’s victory. Naturally, I got a feeling that the media was not being neutral or independent. They wanted Hillary to win the election.                                                                                                                                                    Before the Trump affair the media played a similar role in England during the Brexit vote. The media made us believe that the people who would vote for remaining in the European Union are going to win. Again this was their subjective feeling rather than objective reality. I have been to England quite a few times. The last time I was there was to get my Glory of India award. The ceremony was held in the Crown Plaza Hotel in London. This is right next to the Buckingham Palace. I was also in this Hotel several years ago.  I could see a big change. Many workers were from the foreign countries, particularly from the East European countries.  It was obvious that England is being flooded by the immigrants. I felt that people here must be alarmed by such a fast demographic change. I felt the Brexit vote would be a manifestation of this concern. Therefore I predicted a victory for the Brexit.                                                                                                                                                                                 This raises the question that is the media supposed to report what is happening or they should tell people what to do. Should the media be objective or subjective? I felt that the media was being subjective rather than objective. I feel that the media’s job is to accurately inform the people about what is happening rather than tell them what to do. When the media starts giving filtered and biased information to change the opinion of the people then it is not only overstepping its boundaries it is also defeating its purpose. The media can use its opinion columns and editorials to influence people. However, people should be clearly told the difference between the news coverage and the opinion columns.

Dr. Sawraj Singh, MD F.I.C.S. is the Chairman of the Washington State Network for Human Rights and Chairman of the Central Washington Coalition for Social Justice. He can be reached at sawrajsingh@hotmail.com.

Comments are closed