I'm apparently way too cynical about news organizations - not just Murdoch's - to be properly shocked by any of this. I guess I'm more surprised, really, that so many people seem stunned by it.
For years now, the basic mindset of the average consumer of news has been that anything a journalist or news organization wants to do to find out 'what's going on' is okay because it's politicians and celebrities who deserve to be stalked and harassed. Famous people use the media, so it's okay for the media to use them.
Maybe they do - leaving aside that debate, which I never win - but I think it's incredibly naive of consumers to think those same organizations would limit their desperate acts in the name of 'getting a story' to famous people.
Essentially, western culture several decades ago said, 'hey, you know, it's okay to do anything you want, no matter how unethical, to get a story...as long as it's a famous person who deserves it.' And now we're shocked to find out that the news organizations feel justified in defining 'famous people' rather differently than we do. (Namely, as anyone who having information on is likely to get them money.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2011-07-19 11:49 am (UTC)For years now, the basic mindset of the average consumer of news has been that anything a journalist or news organization wants to do to find out 'what's going on' is okay because it's politicians and celebrities who deserve to be stalked and harassed. Famous people use the media, so it's okay for the media to use them.
Maybe they do - leaving aside that debate, which I never win - but I think it's incredibly naive of consumers to think those same organizations would limit their desperate acts in the name of 'getting a story' to famous people.
Essentially, western culture several decades ago said, 'hey, you know, it's okay to do anything you want, no matter how unethical, to get a story...as long as it's a famous person who deserves it.' And now we're shocked to find out that the news organizations feel justified in defining 'famous people' rather differently than we do. (Namely, as anyone who having information on is likely to get them money.)