Can we trust the media? This question alone could be an essay topic ...
The French have been declaring their dissatisfaction and mistrust of the French media for more than 30 years. Once again, polls were carried out in the wake, and the barometer reveals an unconvincing rate when it comes to confidence in the French media. The crises that the country has known over the past decades do not simplify the matter: the French have this misunderstood need to know the truth.
For their part, the media (written, television or audio) are trying to do what they can to save their image tarnished by time and events. Either way, the people stand firm that there is nothing to be done. Do you feel like you are between a rock and a hard place, looking for truth without knowing where to find it? We have gathered 10 reasons not to trust the French media following the investigations that have been carried out.
Because the media are too often influenced
The figures have fallen and the results are almost heavy given the statements of the majority of people surveyed: "Impossible to trust the French media, as they are influenced, even manipulated". Everyone knows that there have always been companies whose power is immeasurable. Likewise, the political parties have mixed their grain of sand with it, so much so that it has become difficult for the French to take their own side.
Nowadays, as before for that matter, it has become even more difficult to find oneself in the middle of the information published in the media. For example, most of them choose to cover facts that only appeal to them. Cultural events, sporting events, political information, various facts or even information of national impact ... The media have chosen their camp and only publish what they want so that the most important ends up in the trash, far from being mentioned so that everyone can be aware of it.
Because there is too much competition
“Too much competition kills competition! These are the terms used to refer to the multitude of television channels or newspapers that exist today. As it is no longer possible to navigate, and being faced with the colossal difference in reporting (even when it comes to the same subject), the French simply refuse to be convinced by the media. Unless an unprecedented fact is brought up on one of the channels or between the lines of the press, the audience's attention is no longer captivated. In the end, it is the journalists themselves who are putting the spades in their wheels.
Because advertising matters more
Considering the extent of advertising over time, we are not sure how to compare the true to the false. The highest bidder will win for sure, while the target audience will pay the price. Of course, it will be difficult to blame the media for the large presence of advertising on the screen or on the press papers. This constitutes on average nearly 80% of their income, which is why, at the risk of finding themselves without a round at the end of the month, they are more or less obliged to play the game. Only downside: the advertisements are only redirected to spread the strengths of a brand, political party or organization. One then misses to know the details which could have negative effects on the subject in question.
Because we hear too many rumors so too much dishonesty
While cybercrime is at its height, the media, meanwhile, are relentlessly rushing to publish rumors. Basically, viewers and readers should expect at one point or another to read information that is not always true. The term "dishonesty" is then evoked insofar as many journalists fabricate the information and edit it from scratch, just to have an audience that soars more. From another point of view, it may as well be seen as a way to entertain the audience and animate irrelevant topics of discussion. The interest of the media therefore no longer turns to impartiality or to keeping the population up to date, but rather to appear at the top of the list in an environment where competition is fierce.
Because the French media are doing self-censorship
We call self-censorship, the method whose information is modified and filtered. Of course, the media make sure to communicate the facts to listeners, viewers and readers. Nevertheless, are we really lucky to have the full content of these? In fact, this willful omission could lead to the claim that the information is falsified. Be aware that no excuse can justify self-censorship, because many say they want to avoid panicking the people. But isn't the latter entitled to know the real information to prepare for it eventually?
Because journalists try to manipulate the audience
While the media are sort of manipulated and influenced on their side, they also seek to do the same when it comes to the public. We can cite, for example, the propaganda and advertisements mentioned above. Is there not a way to communicate information without bias, so as not to disturb public opinion? Are there not clearer techniques for keeping audiences up to date, even if it involves discussing the strengths or weaknesses of one person or another (physical or moral in this case). It's hard to get rid of the idea that we are hiding things.
Because they're only looking to fulfill their end of the bargain
The goal being to maintain the date of publication in the predestined section, and the time of broadcast for the estimated duration, the media have no other choice but to find information. However, it is not uncommon that due to a lack of information, the content also becomes inconsistent. Regular readers of newspapers, for example, may buy several at a time, for fear of missing information that might have been omitted in one of them. While reading it, it is quite possible that he will come across content that is meaningless in one newspaper, but more or less enriched in the other.
Because we often fall on shells
It is true that no one is perfect and that even the smartest make mistakes. That said, print newspapers and TV news should stand out as they are consistently the content that the public consults the most. Be careful, the criticism does not turn to the mistakes in themselves, but rather to the fact that a badly written word, a badly pronounced term or even a syntax error can quickly transform the meaning of a sentence and of content in its entirety.
Because they refuse to hear the public
Most often, at least in the logic of things, there is no exchange between the media and their receivers. It is usually up to them to communicate, while the audience is content to read, listen and watch. However, this operation has taken a whole different turn lately, as the public supports the fact that they are being thrown with just useless information. Is it really important to maintain a televised debate on the damage caused during a strike rather than analyzing what prompted the protesters to speak up and act?
Because social networks show the facts in their true light
In an era where digital technology has completely taken over our world, it is much easier for the majority to go to social networks to stay informed. A large number of people who took the floor mentioned, for example, the fact that social networks are more rights and open. No filters and more, the information is communicated in its entirety and not in the minimum number of minutes allocated to it.