Has anyone ever wondered how much money Bill O' Reily gets from the Republican Party. After all his nightly relinquishing of intellect in the name of pandering to the far political right must be worth at least some extra pocket change.
In O'Reilly's case I have no idea whether the Party or the government gives him anything. Other cases have come to light, however; Jeff Cohen's book Cable News Confidential goes through this.
In any event, O'Reilly's corporation pays him to air certain views, or pays him to air his views because they are what they are. And the corporation does have its own interests.
Another point, though, is that it costs a lot of money to produce news if one really goes out and researches certain points. It's cheaper to take announcements from sources that are involved. This gets tricky, because no one person in the news corporation has to lie for the news to get misrepresented. After all, if the State Department has an announcement about something it's involved in, that may be considered news in itself, and one may defend the idea that it's not the reporters' place to offer an opinion. But then, when most of the news comes from state sources, and is related without criticism, the product that reaches viewers and readers becomes horribly slanted.
The original selling of the invasion of Iraq to the American people is a prime example that someone has surely analyzed in depth.
2 comments:
How much money does he get anyways? Do you know?
In O'Reilly's case I have no idea whether the Party or the government gives him anything. Other cases have come to light, however; Jeff Cohen's book Cable News Confidential goes through this.
In any event, O'Reilly's corporation pays him to air certain views, or pays him to air his views because they are what they are. And the corporation does have its own interests.
Another point, though, is that it costs a lot of money to produce news if one really goes out and researches certain points. It's cheaper to take announcements from sources that are involved. This gets tricky, because no one person in the news corporation has to lie for the news to get misrepresented. After all, if the State Department has an announcement about something it's involved in, that may be considered news in itself, and one may defend the idea that it's not the reporters' place to offer an opinion. But then, when most of the news comes from state sources, and is related without criticism, the product that reaches viewers and readers becomes horribly slanted.
The original selling of the invasion of Iraq to the American people is a prime example that someone has surely analyzed in depth.
Post a Comment