What we may not realise is that the news we watch on the telly is mostly controlled by the government. Noam Chomsky explains that the unbalance of wealth and power brings stories that favours the upper class. Since adverts are the way that the programme gets their money the channel may favour these news outlets and give stories that will benefit them.
One might say that if the upper class control what news the media covers then why do we hear of stories that bashes the upper class. Below is an example of a story about Meghan Markle, who would be considered elite since being married to the Duke of Sussex.
There have been rumours however that for a long time there has been a deal between the news and the Royal family. One more recent example was linked to Prince Harry. He claims that there was a deal made between the monarchy and the news outlets, more specifically, Rupert Murdoch’s newspaper group. The deal was made to stop royals suing them over phone hacking.
The aim of this deal was to ensure the royal family stayed in this particular news channels’s good books and to avoid any falling out which would indefinitely end with the newspapers writing badly about them. Harry claimed that the agreement was known by his grandmother, the late Queen Elizabeth.
While we might question this theory about the elite controlling the media, let’s propose that there is someone even more rich an powerful paying off the news to cover a story. That would explain the bad written about people.
There is more we can learn from manufacturing Consent. Picking up from earlier when we look at advertising and how crucial they are to keep a news channel running we can then understand that the news will always almost be biased.
Another factor is publishing equipment and expensive reporters and whether the station has the money for this. If it does then it beats out any competition. Therefore it all comes back to advertisers and keeping them happy. Advertisers therefore are in full control and some shows even get taken off the air so as to please advertisers. The people who own the advertisers are the rick and powerful. Channels that have serious documentaries will also have lighter, less intense shows to appeal advertisers. The upper class also control the media by paying so called ‘experts’ to share their views with the media. I myself have read many articles where I have seen the line ‘experts say’. I see them a lot when it comes to the royal family. We must ask then why then are the elite paying experts to do this? The answer may be that It is for them (the rich and elite) to push their own opinions and control the stories before the even more rick and powerful control them first.
Sources:
bored panda.com
theguardian.com
Fourminutebooks.com
I have also noticed that Meghan Markle is always being criticised for doing the same things that Kate Middleton is praised for. The two women are often compared in the tabloids. I am confused and have no clue why the media and public are also judging her. I read some articles and found three anecdoctal reasons for it: 1)racism 2)the fact that she is a foreigner (or an American) 3)the fact that she was an actress. These reasons seem possible and make sense to me. I like the idea in your post that the rich and elite want to push their own opinions and control the news and trends before the even more rich and powerful control them first. I have never thought of this and I think it’s highly possible in this case.
Your blog intrigued me because I hadn’t learnt about this example you gave before. But after doing a relevant search I feel it is a very typical example of news with biased implications. It seems to me that modern news is still in the hands of rich and powerful people who seem to be able to manipulate the news content of the country to control the tide of public opinion. I think this is a very scary thing, but a win-win co-operation for the news media and the upper class.