Technology in the Media

When I was reading the first chapter of To Know Where He Lies last week, it prompted me to think a lot about how technology informs us cross culturally - ie how technological innovations in the media have allowed us to be more globally aware of the goings on of other countries, societies, and cultures. Interestingly, though we can get copious amounts of information about an event less than an hour after it occurs, there are also situations when our informedness can be hindered or even biased by the information we receive.

Satellite radio and television, the internet, and even web-chatting have all been successfully integrated into new reporting and provide more immediate and direct access to a larger pool of information. The way news companies choose to portray such information to the public is still at their discretion. However, with such a quantity of information, there should be little trouble, and in fact an emphasis should be placed on, reporting on events so that either every single faction's bias and opinions are presented or none are included at all. Regardless of which the media chooses to do, their informants will be able to form their own opinions on said events. The "Occupy Wall Street" movement that was heavily featured in news around the globe last year serves as an excellent example of the opportunity to objectively report on an event that centered largely on different people's opinions. Most new companies chose to present all of the hard facts on the phenomenon, in addition to interviewing both  protestors and members of the corporations and lifestyles they were protesting. Naturally, individuals frequently sided with one side of the debate, but the media did not construct their opinions by presenting their news in a one-sided manner.


Unfortunately, despite technical advances in the media, there are still situations in which access to information about events is limited, and in these cases, their presentation frequently leads the public to an uninformed or biased opinion. For example, governments' monopoly on information distribution can seriously hamper other countries' knowledge of their goings on. The student protest in Tiananmen Square in 1989 shows just how limited information can seriously polarize the public's opinion on an event. Though this event was undoubtably as dramatic as we all imagine it to have been, there is obviously more to the story than the notorious photograph of a student in front of a giant tank. However with limited access to news, and in the interest of time, this photograph is what was hotwired overseas and presented to the public.

As almost nothing but that photograph leaked through the Chinese media embargo at that time, it makes sense that it was distributed. News and media are largely relevant because they present current events. Thus presenting knowledge in a timely manner is crucial and takes precedence over presenting completely objective accounts. While many Americans may have interpreted the nature of the Tiananmen Square incident to be more extreme than it actually was, at least these people were informed that this incident even occurred. Unlike "Occupy Wall Street," which was an ongoing event that could be reported on for several weeks with no limitations to information aquiration, Tiananmen Square was a definitive event, and in this case, technology could not accomodate all perspectives.