Reference no: EM133240564

The problem today is that mainstream media does slant towards specific political parties (on both sides). People have political beliefs and then seek out information that reaffirms those beliefs. The media and the freedom and speech and press have been upheld by the courts over the years-although there have been recent lawsuits against magazines and online news outlets. Freedom of speech and the press does not protect simply political news stations. Some news outlets promote celebrity gossip, morally questionable behaviors of celebrities and blatantly false stories to entice the viewer to click and read. Maybe a better question is why we as citizens enjoy reading these articles. A larger question is where is the line between media coverage/freedom of the press and the invasion of personal privacy that each citizens enjoys under our constitution? These questions have been around for a long time, however as technology increases and media is just a click away on our phones or computers, the question keeps resurfacing. These are real questions to consider with regards to this topic. The media is resigned to be a watchdog of sorts over big cooperation to prevent unethical or unlawful acts. This also includes millionaires and billionaires. It was also designed to keep large government in check and to relay information to the voters-us. The media, however, also revolves around money. Classified ads are drastically down, which was the number one money generator for newspapers and magazines. Nowadays, it is online ads. This money is generated by subscriptions, views and online traffic to these websites. Money runs businesses and the media is not immune to this trend.

Here is your question: How would you reform the problem with media today? Be specific (who would regulate it, how it would be regulated, what you would change). Even if you think the media is fine with no changes needed, pretend you had to make changes and describe what those would be.