Going for the KO!

The Affordable Care Act has been a roller coaster of ups and downs and a highlight of media frenzy. 

As Obamacare brought drama within Congress, caused a government shutdown and ultimately launched with a plethora of issues it has fallen on the POTUS and the media, finding new fuel for political turmoil, has jumped all over the coverage and went for the KO with President Obama. 

Media has done a great job highlighting every issue that has come about and done a better job relating it to the POTUS. 

The media highlighted every negative aspect of the Obamacare journey more than effectively pointing out the good aspects of it!

It seems to be the job of media to really highlight more controversy than positivity when it comes to politics. Makes it extremely difficult to trust politicians or add validity to political campaigns when there is so much negativity going on. 

Furthermore, 

by highlighting the negativity of each situation that the POTUS has encountered we find fuel for the opposition. 

With Obama in his final term it is interesting how the media is supposed to be unbiased but inadvertently promotes bias between the parties especially whoever the current POTUS is. 

It definitely seems as if with everything that has happened under the Obama regime lately that the media will set up the KO in any which way possible!

And that KO they are inadvertently going for is definitely a LOW BLOW!

I am not making my argument solely for Obama because it happened under Bush's regime and Clinton's regime. It is just interesting how mass media promotes some bias by always focusing on negative news coverage.  

DON'T BRING FISTS TO A GUN FIGHT!

Granted my blog is focusing on LOW-BLOWS and KNOCK-OUTS of Mass Media and Politics I am going to start my post off with this article!

Champion Boxer Hector "Macho" Camacho Dies After Shooting

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/24/sport/puerto-rico-camacho-death/

Lets take into consideration, COLUMBINE and SANDY HOOK. Lets take in consideration the movie theater incident. 

Gun Control is a HUGE issue yet it is never a formidable issue when it comes to political campaigns as one of my classmates alluded to in their discussion leader posts. 

The bigger issue to me, in reference to mass media is the media's impact on gun control. 

When those situations occurred Media covered them heavily. Those situations were TOP STORIES and led to debates and rallies for Gun Control. 

President Obama weighed in his opinion and concerns on Gun Control met by opposition and affirmation. Once those issues became past circumstances you no longer heard about them OR gun control. 

It is amazing, the impact that media has on making things happen yet much of the positivity they can ascertain is never tapped into. If media was persistent with these issues gun control would NEVER fall to the wayside. 

We often wait for something big to happen before we decide to be prepared to take a stance when we continue to see things happening yet do nothing. The crazy part about much of these situations is that media appeals to the emotions of those while they can and once they tap those out they move on. 

Media gives the viewers what they WANT but what about what the viewers NEED. Sandy Hook is over but Gun Control isn't so why stop GUN CONTROL COVERAGE. 

Problems in Syria have died down but it does not mean that there are no threats that need to be addressed. There are constant changes everyday that are failed to be reported because it's no longer "relevant" at least until something happens. 

It is imperative that media continues to follow up on issues that were of BIG importance at one point until those issues are rectified. Problems will always be problems until solutions are put into effect.

PERFORMANCE KNOCKOUT or MEDIA LOW-BLOW

THE AMERICAN MUSIC AWARDS were absolutely great performance wise but they opened my eyes to TV's portrayal of politics and mass media. 

As were mentioned SCANDAL in prior blogs, 

Let's take a look at this photograph of Lady Gaga and R. Kelly performing their new song!

First and foremost they followed the concept of SCANDAL! 

So again I ask, is media now taking what we SEE as political coverage (The drama, etc) and using it for effective ratings or is this just a good performance by two very popular artists. 

One thing that kind of bumped me about this performance too is that Gaga looked A LOT like Marilyn Monroe which could have toyed the line the late President Kennedy's affair with the Monroe. 

More political scandal and controversy!

Are these Knockout performances or blatant LOW BLOWS to media's coverage of what should be pertinent issues when it comes to politics. 

SCANDAL SCANDAL SCANDAL!

SCANDAL!!!!

We talked through our discussions about news media. We questioned why media focuses on political lifestyles opposed to political policy and business.  We have discussed hard news versus soft news and some people have made the argument to really push the impact of ratings and viewers count on media's stance when it comes to delivering the news!

This got me thinking about SCANDAL!!!

One of the NUMBER ONE shows on television right now garnering "Scandal Parties" and mass twitter participation, SCANDAL fall right into play with our class concept. 

It is rather AMAZING that one of the hottest shows on television this year is centered around politics and political scandal. A show centered HEAVILY on the lifestyle of a president, his wife and his mistress. 

Ultimately is this what government has come to? Shows that follow medias perception of politics. 

Do you think this show really takes what the media gives us and makes a powerful sitcom out of it!

Is SCANDAL a KNOCK-OUT show or a LOW-BLOW to the state of Mass Media and Politics?

POLITICAL TKO

POLITICAL TKO

It is definitely evident that the bout between the two sides of our bicameral legislature definitely fought it out over the Affordable Care Act AKA Obamacare. 

This fight continuously went back and forth ultimately ending in the government shutdown itself. The sad part is that the government all had issues with the Affordable Care Act but I did not ultimately see a solution centered around compromise. 

While we can continuously argue the government shutdown and how it negatively affected millions except those that caused the shutdown, lets alter our focus on the coursework. 

Media coverage of the government shutdown was as enthused as political campaigns themselves. Do you think the media effectively informed and educated the audience? 

Answer these questions?

Do you know exactly what the Affordable Care Act is?

Do you know how government shutdowns occur?

Do you know EXACTLY why the government shutdown occurred?

Who is ultimately responsible for the government shutdown?

What were the benefits of the shutdown if any?

What were the consequences?

From my POV, 

We understand what the Affordable Care Act is but the media put more emphasis on Congress's argument for or against almost to a point where you had to side with your political party instead of really being able to decide what may have been best for yourself.

I honestly can NOT tell you how government shutdowns occur, but I do remember media outlets counting down the time to the government shutdown and the politicians who held the floor for numerous hours in opposition to the ACA. 

I understand that the government shutdown occurred over the ACA but I can NOT ultimately tell you the exact reasons as to why the govt shutdown. 

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SHUTDOWN? Ultimately Congress, but I am sure it is much more to it including the POTUS.

We definitely never saw coverage of anything beneficial and the consequences were detrimental considering many people were out of a job. 

Somehow, however, the media did make sure to note that Congress were still being paid regardless of the nation's suffering. 

Ultimately, 

I guess the point I am making is that the media will focus on the drama, THE COUNTDOWN, the HOURS OF SPEECH TO KILL TIME, THE SHUTDOWN ITSELF, etc. but did not effectively inform and educate or offer ways for the public to get involved or have their voice heard in a way that would be substantial. 

The media needs viewers for ratings and ultimately should cater to the positivity of their viewers, 

Not saying they don't have effective presentation but it could be more thought out!

Otherwise, 

 Outside of the government LOW BLOWS and KNOCKOUTS, 

we have Political TKO due to ineffective media presentation. 

Watch Out for the Hook!

It is AMAZING how MEDIA COVERAGE on political matters tend to FALL by the wayside once "DANGER" is no longer imminent but "OUT OF SIGHT OUR OF MIND DOESNT ALWAYS WORK"

In Boxing/Martial Arts, 

fighters tend to watch hours of tape of their opponents in preparation for upcoming fights. It is often interesting to fighters get knocked out from a blow that just wasn't expected because it is a primary weapon in their challengers arsenal. 

If I am known for a devastating uppercut that doesn't not mean "DONT WATCH OUT FOR THE HOOK!"

THE HOOK COULD BE THE KNOCKOUT BLOW!!!

How does this relate to MEDIA??

Let's look at the issues in Syria!

We had immense coverage on Syria when we were contemplating a strike against Syria. Media had constant coverage, analysts and reports from DC to Syria. 

Although the strikes on Syria are no longer imminent that does not mean coverage should diminish. 

From our Twitters, 

we realize there are numerous talks on issues in Syria and nuclear warfare although the headlines are more concerned with Miley Cyrus. 

Soft news vs. Hard News. 

The Assad regime has been a huge impact and been a thorn for the U.S. and should never be taken lightly. 

For coverage to almost completely go by the wayside almost gives the assumption that we are no longer concerned as a nation about pending threat. 

Even in reference to the UN delegations. We provide coverage and highlight key points from around the world but don't really offer the analysis or in-depth details of the various occurences. 

All I am saying is, 

MEDIA never really seems to dive deep into an issue or cover an issue until something big happens. 

I believe we have a right to stay informed and it is medias job to gain information. 

We should never feel that nothing is going on and then be shocked when an attack happens.

9/11 was a BIG issue of that. 

There was so much conspiracy that media didn't cover or release until after the incident happened. 

Preparation is the key to success and we have a right to know.

I ask again!!!

Is Mass Media LOW-BLOWING the people or doing a KNOCKOUT job???

Mass Media and Politics or Mixed Martial Arts!!!

As we dig deeper into the semester we realize more and more the impact that mass media has on politics. 

A key point is to avoid political rants in these blog assignments but I believe it is imperative to incorporate a sense of self intertwined with the learnings from our discussions and assignments!

With that being said, 

The issue at hand is how Mass Media covers the Congress's outlook on Syria opposed to the issues on the homefront i.e. a potential government shutdown!!!

First and foremost, 

We look at Congress's lean towards approval of a strike on Syria which could cost the U.S. more money and have negative effects on the nation overall. 

However, when we looked at the potential Government shutdown because of the Senate's disapproval to defund Obamacare you wonder where the mindset of the Congress lies. Granted, it would be cheaper to not fund the Affordable Healthcare Act, it provides millions of uninsured the ability to take better care of themselves. It could increase the overall health status of America as a whole as well. 

The potential strike on Syria could lead to a war, innocent lives being lost and really does NOTHING for the nation as a whole. 

So how does Mass Media have an impact on it all!!!

The coverage of both issues. The media puts added emphasis on the STRIKE ON SYRIA than on a proper analysis of the positive or negative impact it could have on the nation. 

The media portrays more about a GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN than it does about the positive or negative impact ObamaCare or defunding it.

The media hardly displays the benefits or proper analysis of either situation and I guess you could argue that they focus on more of a "he said, she said" concept than a hard-news reporting subject. 

Much of the news coverage is "Representative So and So from Texax said this" and "Senate House leader had that to say" and "President Obama weighed in on this" as opposed to really covering IN-DEPTH each issue. 

The analyses they provided were more on the STANCES of each political party's policy and reasoning behind their overall decisions opposed to proper analysis of  benefits and consequences. 

It would have been nice to really cover and explain to Americans, many of which don't deal with politics due to lack of understanding, the benefits and consequences of each situation including a looming Strike on Syria or Government Shutdown. 

Mass Media or Mixed Martial Arts???

Is MASS MEDIA in regards to POLITICS fighting for the PEOPLE or the POLITICIANS???

We don't want the "spin" we would really enjoy the truth!!! 

In a democracy, the people have a voice and we vote in politicians to represent our voice but if we don't understand what we are voting about then what are we really voting for???

Is Mass Media Low-Blowing the people or doing a KNOCK OUT job?