As much as I would love to believe something like having a peer review board would help eliminate some of the bias that we are seeing far too often in today’s media, I like to consider myself realistic here at Modern Media. When I really think about about having something like that put in place my brain just immediately starts thinking of how inevitable it would be before the board started getting paid off by big corporations and the whole thing would just be a waste of time.
I really need to work on my attitude sometimes…
It Is What It Is I Guess
Even though I like to act as though I steer clear and avoid certain media outlets today I have to be honest with my readers. I am pretty guilty of watching them all and I just can’t help it. Things like click bait gets me all the time and even though I have talked about how much I hate certain stations like Fox News, I find myself watching them and checking out their websites almost every day. The reasons I watch them might be different from others, but I do watch it and find some form of entertainment from them.
So I guess as a whole, we really have to take the good with the bad as far as media outlets and certain ways that we get our voices heard go. Remember these guys?
Little companies like this wouldn’t stand a chance if it weren’t for the ease of getting information out to the public these days. I would much rather have these circumstances than them not having a chance at all.
So now that we’ve discussed certain forms of media and platforms out there today and how they have their benefits and their not so benefits here at Modern Media I think I can start talking about some things that I would maybe do differently if I had it my way.
In an attempt to make things less biased and more based on facts for viewers and not just opinions when it comes to more serious news stories such as politics, I think it would be awesome if news channels or websites had to submit their stories to a small panel for a quick peer review, kind of like what credible and legitimate scientists and psychologists have to do before their research is published. The peers would have to consist of people who have gone through some sort of training or have a lot of credibility when it comes to seeing facts and distinguishing biases.
I guess something like this would be next to impossible to do for news channels on TV because most of the stories that are aired are almost immediately following what actually happened. But for things like newspapers or for stories that have been in the works for a long time I think having a panel of professionals quickly review the piece would have a tremendous positive impact on far as credibility goes with the news.
This is just me throwing ideas out there, I really haven’t thought about too many details into this thing. Who knows how applicable it could actually be in the real world but hey at least I’m trying, right?