These are the cold hard facts: The major media units are huge corporations dictating what should be discussed within a certain framework. These institutions naturally work in their own interests, thus dissident opinions have no say here because that would undermine the corporation’s capital interests. The smaller media units will have to adapt to the agenda set by those in power, because they lack resources to act differently.
Knowing this, let’s look at the sources reporters use. Since they work within this framework, the sources they use are not unbiased expert sources, but rather sources that represent already established opinions and that work in their (the corporation’s) own interests. Many times the reporters are not even aware of how this works, due to the illusion of open debate mentioned in Part 1 (only pre-defined opinions within chosen subjects within a chosen framework are allowed).
If you chose to go outside these established opinions you will face major resistance. You will realize that the level of evidence requested all of a sudden is extremely high. If you’re reporting about vested interests, you hardly won’t need any verification at all. If you’re writing about atrocities carried out by the guerilla, all you need is one hearsay witness for confirmation and then you’ll be able to write endless shitty articles about it without anyone questioning you. If you want to write about torture carried out by an American military officer you’ll need videotapes, tons of witnesses and a whole goddamn mountain of evidence to back it up – or else you won’t get through in major media. One quote from a “high U.S. government official” is good as reliable evidence, while ten quotes from a dissident voice are worth nothing. Knowing this, and knowing what it’s like to work where things have to happen fast, it’s easy to understand why most journalists choose the easy way out. They have neither the time nor the pride to fuck with those in the major league. Naturally, the big boys won’t even let you do that because that would be undermining the core of the corporation. Also, a journalist simply cannot afford to lose his job…
Major media consists of a few mega-corporations and when it comes down to it it’s all about increasing profits and market shares. That’s how corporate capitalism works. It’s nothing new, it’s nothing odd. That’s the way it is. And if you’re not in there to play the game, to help your corporation to increase profits and so on, then there’s no place for you in the game. You’re voice will not be heard if you’re raging against the system. Simple as that.
You’ll have to take your work elsewhere, and sometimes not even the alternative media will be good enough. When dealing with certain subjects you’ll be forced to take your work underground, which is exactly quite the opposite of what society should want you to do, had it practised what it preaches: freedom of speech, democracy and justice for all.
Sadly, that’ not how it works and ultimately this false representation of virtues and moral will end in conflict.