From: hiramc@sco.COM (Hiram Clawson)
Subject: Re: TELEVISION
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1992 23:41:40 GMT
Followup-To: alt.activism


I noticed the recent mention of Television.  I've heard, but not
yet read, there is a good book on the subject by Jerry Mander:
Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television.
I recently finished Mander's "In The Absence Of The Sacred" which
is certainly a thought provoking book questioning the whole direction
of technological society.

I posted the following in some local news groups here recently.
I forward to add to the Television debate:

As the Food Bin marquee recently stated: "Your TV is lying to you", a recent
survey of TV news watchers' knowledge of events shows a large gap in reality.
Our good friend, Ron Record, says "Heal Your TV" instead of "Kill Your TV".
I appreciate the non violent attitude expressed by Ron, and it appears that,
to effectively "Heal Your TV" you are going to have to turn the damned thing
off and open your eyes to the real world.  Read a book once in a while,
for goodness sakes !  I think it was Ben Franklin who said: "One who
doesn't read, is no better off than one who can't read."

We often hear the lament these days that the government is failing and
the lack of choices at the polls is a dismal statement on the state
of our society.  However it is not surprising that the U.S. electorate
continues to vote for idiots and vote the opposite of their legitimate
interests.  The voting public is consistently lied to and misled by
the prime media outlets.  I know it is hard work, but to correct the
record you are personally going to have to take responsibility and
talk back to the media.  When you see a story in the newspaper or on
TV News that is misleading, pick up the phone or the pen, call the
news director, write to the editor, write to the journalist and demand
the facts be presented properly.  The TV stations' phone numbers are in
the book.  No one else is going to do this job for you.  The future
rests in your hands.

--Hiram

 [*~   Hiram Clawson - Member, Technical Staff, The Santa Cruz Operation    ~*]
 [*~   P.O. Box 1900, Santa Cruz, CA 95061 - tel. 408-427-7519              ~*]
 [*~ FAX: 408-458-0811, Electronic mail: uunet!sco!hiramc or hiramc@sco.COM ~*]

    Short Quiz:

    Which income group pays the highest percentage of their income in
    state and local taxes?  [Highest income, Middle income, Lowest income]

    The U.S. and other industrialized countries give aid to countries
    throughout Africa, and they receive money back through debt and interest
    payments.  What would you estimate the ratio of money given to money
    received to be ?  [20-1, 10-1, 5-1, 1-1, 1-5, 1-10, 1-20]

    What proportion of the federal budget is allocated to foreign aid ?
    	[% 50, % 30, % 10, % 3, < % 1]

    What percentage of the unemployed receive unemployment benefits from
    the government ?  [% 100, % 80, % 60, % 40, % 20]

    Since the early 1970's, this percentage of unemployed receiving benefits has
    [increased, stayed the same, decreased].

    The Bush administration has [increased, maintained, decreased] the
    amount of wetlands under government protection.

    The Bush administration has [led, cooperated with, lagged behind]
    international efforts to cut ozone depleting gases.

    Following the Gulf [Golf] War, [democracy, the monarchy] has been
    restored to Kuwait.

    The Bush administration responded to the killing of the Jesuits in
    El Salvador by urging Congress to [cut, continue, increase] economic
    aid to the government of El Salvador until the murderers were brought
    to justice.

    Following China's crackdown on pro-democracy protests, the Bush
    administration urged Congress to [impose sanctions against, continue most
    favored nation trading status with] China.

    In 1975, which country brutally invaded East Timor, and has occupied
    it ever since ?  [China, North Korea, Indonesia, Soviet Union, Vietnam]

    Compared to the Somoza regime, the Sandinista government of Nicaragua
    had a [better, same, worse] record of human rights violations.

    The United Nations has repeatedly condemned [the Palestinians, Israel]
    for occupying other people's land.

    People who obtain their news [mostly, seldom] from television news
    [rarely, often] understand what is going on in the world.

    ------

    from pages 16-17, EXTRA! September 1992, Vol. 5, No. 6

    TV NEWS: The More You Watch, The Less You Know

    What Do We Learn From the News ?  More Myths Than Facts, Survey Suggests

    By Justin Lewis

    Pollsters sometimes try to measure news media quality by asking the
    members of the public whether they feel it is accurate and unbiased.
    One might more reliably determine the quality of news by measuring
    what people have learned from it.  Since news media are often the
    public's main source of information about politics and current
    affairs, a well-informed public may be taken as a sign that the media
    are doing a good job.

    As part of an ongoing study on news, public knowledge and public
    opinion, the Center for the Study of Communication (U-Mass/Amherst)
    conducted a survey of 550 university students in spring 1992.  We
    wanted to see what information people knew, and to explore whether
    this information reflected an ideological bias.

    Since TV is the most important source of news for most Americans, we
    divided our sample into "heavy," "medium" and "light" viewers of TV
    news to see whether regularly watching TV news increased awareness of
    politics and society.  Our survey indicated a striking lack of
    knowledge on the part of college students.  Facts that support an
    independent or critical perspective were often not known, and
    misconceptions that encourage a politically conservative or
    establishment view of the world were common.

    Media Themes

    Some questions were asked to test whether what seemed to be frequent
    media themes had affected the way people perceive the world.  One
    story that has been repeatedly told by the news media recently is the
    plight of the middle class, which has supposedly become the victim of
    an economic system that gives tax breaks to the rich and handouts to
    the poor.  When we asked, "Which income group pays the highest
    percentage of their income in state and local taxes?" 70 percent said
    the middle 20 percent; only 14 percent gave the correct answer, the
    poorest 20 percent (Citizens for Tax Justice News, 4/22/91).

    Another frequent media theme is that the U.S. goes out of its way to
    help other countries.  We asked: "The U.S. and other industrialized
    countries give aid to countries throughout Africa, and they receive
    money back through debt and interest payments.  What would you
    estimate the ratio of money given to money received to be?"  Only 12
    percent knew that Africa pays out more than it gets back.  The great
    majority assumed that the burden was on the richer countries like the
    U.S. - 45 percent actually estimated that industrialized nations give
    out 20 times more than they receive back.  Foreign development aid is
    a tiny blip in the federal expenditure, yet nearly 1 in 5 of our
    college-student sample said it absorbed more of the federal budget
    than any other item, including the military.

    Many of the misleading assumptions made by our respondents fit into a
    pattern of conservative beliefs about economy and society.  A majority
    of respondents greatly overestimated the benefits that African
    Americans had gotten from affirmative action, and there was a
    widespread assumption that government social programs are distinctly
    more generous than they actually are.  Since the mid-'70s, the
    percentage of unemployed people receiving benefits has declined from a
    high of more than 70 percent to less than 40 percent (Dollars & Sense,
    6/91).  Yet more people assumed a large increase in the percentage
    enjoying benefits (44 percent) than assumed a big decrease (36
    percent).  Twelve percent actually think the federal government spends
    more money on welfare than on anything else.

    The Bush Record

    One responsibility of the press is to inform the public about the
    actions of public officials.  We asked questions to determine how much
    our sample knew about the record of President Bush.

    On Bush's environmental record, results were mixed.  While 48 percent
    were aware that the Bush administration has reduced the amount of
    wetlands under government protection, more (50 percent) think he has
    maintained (19 percent) or increased (32 percent) it.  Similarly,
    while 46 percent are aware that, under Bush, the U.S. has lagged
    behind other nations in cutting down on the emission of ozone
    depleting gases, more (49 percent) think the U.S. has either led the
    way or been a cooperative partner on this issue.  These numbers may
    reflect the media's strenuous attempts to be "evenhanded" rather than
    accurate about Bush's record.

    Perhaps the most oft-repeated journalistic claim about Bush is that he
    good on foreign policy and weak on domestic policy.  And yet, as we
    discovered, people not only know very little about the president's
    foreign policy, they have actually endowed him with positions that run
    directly counter to those he holds.

    Despite some journalists' questioning of the kid-gloves treatment
    given to the Bush administration during the Gulf [Golf] War, little has been
    done to counteract the large doses of misinformation handed out during
    the war itself.  Fifty-five percent have been left with the impression
    that "democracy has been restored to Kuwait," when actually the
    monarchy was restored to power.

    Foreign Policy

    Our respondents revealed widespread ignorance of the nature of U.S.
    foreign policy.  From Cambodia to Zaire, they assumed the U.S.
    government had condemned groups or dictators that it had actually
    supported.  Respondents, like the media, tended to see U.S. allies as
    "good guys" and official enemies as "bad guys."

    When asked how the Bush administration responded to the killing of the
    Jesuits in El Salvador, for example, most chose answers that showed
    the administration taking a strong pro-human rights stand: "They
    threatened to cut off aid if the murderers were not immediately
    brought to justice" (38 percent) or "They urged Congress to cut aid by
    50 percent" (32 percent).  The correct answer ("They urged Congress to
    continue aid to the Salvadoran government") was picked by only 24
    percent.

    Our respondents used similar assumptions when asked about the Bush
    policy toward China following the crackdown on pro-democracy protests.
    Most of our respondents thought that Bush had imposed sanctions, while
    only 30 percent realized that China still enjoyed "most favored
    nation" trading status.  Despite the media attention given to the
    crackdown, the fact that the administration actually vetoed
    congressional attempts to impose sanctions on China was generally
    unknown.

    We asked respondents, "In 1975, which country brutally invaded East
    Timor, and has occupied it ever since?"  Five options were offered,
    four of which were Communist "bad guys" (China, North Korea, Vietnam
    and the Soviet Union), along with the correct answer, Indonesia, which
    is a capitalist ally of the U.S.  Our respondents preferred every one
    of the "bad guy" countries over Indonesia, which came in last with
    12.5 percent.

    While the "good guys" are exonerated, the worst is assumed of the "bad
    guys."  Most independent experts agree that the Sandinista
    government's human rights record in Nicaragua was an improvement over
    the Somoza regime it replaced.  Yet more than two-thirds of
    respondents said that the human rights situation deteriorated when the
    Sandinistas took over.

    Similarly, more respondents (31 percent) thought that the Palestinians
    had been repeatedly condemned by the UN for occupying other people's
    land than thought that Israel had been so condemned (27 percent).  It
    is not that the media have ignored or covered up Israel's occupation,
    but they have downplayed Israel's isolation on this issue, while at
    the same time tending to portray the Palestinians as the "bad guys" in
    the conflict.  Since the answer seems to call for a "bad guy," these
    trends in coverage combine to make the topsy turvy answer seem more
    reasonable.

    More News Is Bad News

    Our general argument would suggest that watching more TV news would
    decrease knowledge of facts that do not fit in with the mainstream
    ideologies and mythologies.  We were not, therefore, surprised to find
    that heavy TV news viewers were often less well informed than light TV
    news viewers.

    As compared to medium and light viewers, heavy viewers were four times
    less likely to know that Indonesia is occupying East Timor, five times
    less likely to know that the Sandinistas' human rights record was an
    improvement over the Somozas' and two times less likely to assume that
    much more money flows from Africa to the West rather than the other
    way around.

    Such correlations do not, on their own, prove cause and effect -
    people who watch less TV news, for example may be much more likely to
    do other things that would make them more knowledgeable (such as heavy
    reading).  Nevertheless, our research does suggest a pattern of
    ideological bias, where those facts that might lead people to critique
    establishment or conservative positions are generally downplayed or
    excluded.

    (C) Copyright 1992 Justin Lewis

    Justin Lewis is the director of the Center for the Study of
    Communication and an associate professor at the University of
    Massachusetts at Amherst.  Kristen Zirkel assisted with this research.

    --End EXTRA! quote--