Saturday, September 12, 2015
Mr. Miller's Views On Elitist And Populist Exsposed! (Wow I'm Bad at Titles.)
Mr. Miller's lecture on elitist and populist companies was, in my opinion, a good lecture over all. As part of our binary models lesson, it provided a nice insight on the world of journalism and how companies work. One thing that I couldn't help notice though, was the way he portrayed populist news companies. Now I understand that yes, they are in it for the money, but that does not make them bad companies or the wrong type of journalism. He should have made this more clear in his lecture and given us a better understanding on how these types of news companies really work and the motives of why the singular reporter in said company would release articles or share news, not the company as a whole.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Yes, populist media companies are in it for the money and this doesn't make them bad companies. These types of companies want to make more money to reach different groups of audiences which is their main purpose. My theory is, the companies that are now populist started as elitist but figured out that that type of media with their magazine or newspaper company, could not make money.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with piper. In my post about Elitist verses Populist I did not even consider that standpoint. I made it seem like Populist was a negative form of journalism, which is not the case. Certain companies fit certain age groups and their purpose is to reach a certain audience. There is nothing wrong with that. It makes it easier for an audience, looking for something that specifically interests them, to follow a blog that suits them religiously. I could not agree more. I have a newfound outlook on this topic.
ReplyDeletePopulist media companies aren't necessarily evil, or bad at journalism. It's just that when they have to choose between principle and profit, they are likelier to choose the latter.
ReplyDelete