Are we a better republic and better voters because of the development of digital/social media?

Wether or not we are better voters because of the development of digital/social media or not really depends on a couple of factors. Wether the canidates effectively use social media or not and wether the voters use social media or not. These two factors vary all across politics which makes answering are we a better republic and better voters difficult. Overall I would say social media does make us better overall voters, although not all voters and not all politicians utilize social media for those who do it most certainly enhances the overall voting experience.
Digital/New Media is changing politics, almost every action and every word politicians say can and usually is put up on the internet for the world to see. This creates a very "informed" public, a lot of the information is valuable and helps make better voters but some of the information is useless and, if anything, makes us worse voters. For example in the forum on tuesday when the guests were asked who utilized social media the best out of the three canidates there was an agreement that Romney was utilizing it best out of the republican party. He tweets and shows useful information about his politics and where he stands on certain issues. Canidates like Romney help create a much more informed voting public and its because of people like him and Barack Obama that I beleive the social media is making better voters overall. Where the counterarguement comes in is when the public receives social media from politicians such as Sarah Palin. When her name was brought up at the social media forum the three guests laughed and basically said her social media was entertaining but in no way was useful to their political mindset. Other then the actual content I think more people need to get involved with social media for it really to become a factor in the way we vote. I for one, was not really aware of the social media options available to me, I didn't know there was so much political information and knowledge waiting to be learned from simply making a twitter and following the right people. I feel as though many people are in a similar situation and they need to be shown, as I was, the usefullness and information that social media can offer. Overall I think social media does help us become a better republic and better voters but if we could also improve on the content and the amount of people using social media it would be an even bigger factor to our republic and our voters.

Traditional Media Vs. Investigative Media and its Effect on Politicians

America trusts in its people to vote responsibly, which is essential for an effective democracy. This means that the country’s voters should be encouraged by the media to examine the personal lives of candidates for political office to evaluate not what they are, but who they are. In Roosevelt’s four terms as president, the people’s confidence in him may have been reinforced by the media’s tentativeness to photograph him above the waist, not displaying his handicap, but his wisdom, swift decision-making and resilience of character are the traits that allowed for his sustained support. In other words, a front-page photo portraying his paralysis would not have received nearly the equal negative affect on his image as his leadership and eloquence added positively. This is because candidates receive political office based on merit, not appearance.

Former president, Richard Nixon and former congressman, Anthony Weiner are clear examples of people whose true characters were brought out by the media. The explosion of media regarding Weiner’s sexting scandal and the intense Watergate investigation allowed American voters to realize that they had inaugurated disingenuous men each of whom must have claimed to stand behind family values. By shedding light on their scandals, the media can share the facts with the people who then have the opportunity to elect someone new (in the case of Weiner). This lets politicians know that they must the live under the same standards they encourage while campaigning and encourages voters that democracy still exists.

Respect for privacy by the media is valuable for everyday Americas, but for those running for important political office, they must know that they are subject to high expectations and their flaws will be noticed. If their imperfections, whether physical or action-based outweigh their strengths and become a significant distraction or impairment to their jobs, voters must be trusted to take responsible action, and investigative media helps them do that.

-Luke deWilde

What Responsibilities Do Media Producers Have to Their Consumers?

Media producers play a vital role in making sure that the business that “the media” conducts satisfies and keeps the consumers interested. The responsibilities that media producers uphold are: to make the news feel evocative, entertain the audience, educate the public, and most importantly to give consumers options. By making the news evocative or, in other words, making the audience feel connected to the story, the consumers are more likely to enjoy what is being produced because they are able to identify or relate to the situation presented. For example, if a news broadcast presented a documentary on diaries of people suffering in Darfur as opposed to just statistics being rambled off, the consumers are going to feel more compassionate and intrigued in the story. However, I feel there is a grey area in the media between entertaining the consumer and educating the consumer. After all, the main role the media plays in our society is a business designed to educate and entertain. Where do we draw the line? This is a tough commitment media producers endorse to the public, to provide education and entertainment, because when dealing with a broad heterogeneous audience it is hard to please most people with more education rather than entertainment. I believe that the media producers have to find ways to present “the boring news” in lively new ways to diminish the line between entertainment and education and simply make it one.

Lastly, when reading Republic.com 2.0, Ch. 1 I discovered another responsibility the media had to their consumers: giving the viewers options, but not so many options that the viewers become a narrow-minded type of audience. The book explains that this is another hard situation to deal with because how do you offer different types of options, but at the same time have to be careful with the amount of resources that you do offer so society doesn’t lose the sense of Democracy and free-speech? If people are given too many options they begin to listen and speak only to the “like-minded”. With evolving technology, the media has to be careful with the resources they provide to the public to avoid people obtaining tunnel vision instead of getting a holistic view, which is ultimately idealistic. To wrap up, media producers have difficult responsibilities to make sure that they remain in control of their business to avoid the collapse of democracy and the rise of extreme racialists, but also have to keep their business entertaining, educative, but also evocative. That is quite the job.

-Brittany Marien

Should the news be personalized? Why/Why not?

While offering many diverse news sources is a clear sign of a free, uncensored society, it should not be personalized. Personalized news does provide curious people with a many options. However, society cannot rely on everyone to be curious, and seek out news that may conflict with his or her beliefs. It is inevitable that people will seek out news sources that agree with their beliefs, reinforce their ideas, and make their beliefs more and more extreme.

An argument discussed in Sunstein’s book is that people must be exposed to unplanned, unanticipated encounters. The news is an entertaining stream of current events that are rarely anticipated. If one settles into a routine of only watching liberal news shows, or only reading about celebrity scandals, they will isolate themselves from the majority of current events, resulting in a society where general-interest intermediaries no longer exist. The news should be convenient and diverse. However, people should not be able to isolate themselves from their peers through one-sided news sources.

-Tricia