'Greatest generation' vs Baby boomers

[Rick486]

Don't you think that a contributing factor in the loss of confidence in all manner of our institutions is the unprecedented growth in media and the visibility we now have into the government at all levels? I'm not sure that the governance processes were that much different earlier in our history, but the government was also orders of magnitude smaller, again at all levels, in the 50's let's say. I'm not sure how that factors into all this but I was struck by the recent poll which you may have seen that showed a majority of folks in the US view the federal government as a clear and present threat to their freedom. What does that indicate?

[killarney_sailor]

Originally Posted by Rick486

Don't you think that a contributing factor in the loss of confidence in all manner of our institutions is the unprecedented growth in media and the visibility we now have into the government at all levels? I'm not sure that the governance processes were that much different earlier in our history, but the government was also orders of magnitude smaller, again at all levels, in the 50's let's say. I'm not sure how that factors into all this but I was struck by the recent poll which you may have seen that showed a majority of folks in the US view the federal government as a clear and present threat to their freedom. What does that indicate?

The media is also discussed at length in this book. They make the point that when there were three networks and newspapers as the only news media, information was 'broadcast' to everyone. Now outlets can make considerable money narrowcasting information to particular constituencies. In addition, all-news channels and internet outlets have to find something to portray as news on a 24/7 basis - so unimportant stuff gets disproportionate and inappropriate coverage.

The suggest that someone as influential and widely respected as Walter Cronkite could not exist in today's media world.

Read the book, much food for thought in many areas.

[PBzeer]

Yes, there is definitely a difference in the media, now and then.

Then: 3 networks and a handful of big city newspapers decided what was news, when you'd hear about it (if at all), and how and what you'd hear about it. There were few alternatives to the consensus of Big Media, who's only differences were in style, not substance.

Now: Big Media has become the Mainstream Media, and choices abound for news consumers who question the documented liberal bias of the MSM. A situation that those of Mr Friedmans ilk find appalling and dangerous.

[SloopJonB]

Originally Posted by killarney_sailor

Now outlets can make considerable money narrowcasting information to particular constituencies.

Therein lies the problem methinks. Due to this targeted broadcasting and people getting their "news" from the Internet from sites they already agree with, they are not getting the diversity of opinion they used to. This is a fundamental cause of the polarization of peoples views IMHO. It also allows or assists the rise to prominence of nobodies who would never have gotten anywhere in "the good old days".

As to Cronkite, there just isn't anyone of his caliber around. Limbaugh is pretty prominent, Blitzer et.al. are very well known - they just ain't a patch on Uncle Walt. - he was special. Even in his day there was no competition for him - Reasoner, Huntley/Brinkley etc. were good but definitely second string to Walter. Nowadays there is too much emphasis on their "performance" and looks for them to last for decades.