| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "MEDIA DEMOCRACY": |
|
|
"Rich Media, Poor Democracy", 2003.
Analysis of Robert McChesney's book "Rich Media, Poor Democracy".
690 words (approx. 2.8 pages), 1 source, APA, $ 23.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
An analysis of Robert McChesney's book "Rich Media, Poor Democracy". The paper examines the author's major ideas and his combination of historical with contemporary media environment. The paper looks at the main argument that structural media reform is vital to preserve democracy.
From the Paper
In Rich Media Poor Democracy Robert W McChesney argues that the media including the Internet serve the interests of corporate profit rather than the public interest. The result of the concentrated corporate power that McChesney details is the weakening of ..."
| |
|
Australian Media and Democracy, 2004.
This paper looks at the role of the media in Australian democracy.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 31.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines what role the media plays in Australian democracy. In this essay, the writer looks at control of the media. The writer discusses how such control affects its focus. The writer also discusses the role of media moguls such as Murdoch and Kerry.
From the Paper
"The media in Australia is centralized and owned by a few large monopolies and government connivance has assisted the process. There is a link between the government, the great corporations and the free media which has built a system of economic political and psychological control over the people. The media boosts politicians and academics who push the right ideas and create sympathy for particular causes. The media is therefore acting as a propaganda organ for the government. The education system is also involved in this control ... "
| |
|
Power of the Media over Democracy, 2005.
This paper discusses the power of the media and our democracy.
1,995 words (approx. 8.0 pages), 8 sources, MLA, $ 63.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This is an opinion paper which argues that the impact of the American media has politicized a pluralist democracy among the majority by creating a marginalized society, leaving the corporations, including the media, and the American politicians at the top of the pinnacle concerning political decisions and elite power.
From the Paper
"This bacama avidantly claar whan Richard Barlin, tha prasidant and chiaf axacutiva officar of tha Haarst Corporation in Naw York, askad Prasidant Richard Nixon to grant him immunity from tha antimonopoly law that had in pravious yaars sant othar corporata axacutivas to jail. Tha Haarst Corporation "ownad nina nawspapars, tan broadcasting stations, twanty-six magazinas, and a book publishing housa" (Adalstain). Nixon knaw that if ha did not axampt Barlin from tha law, his actions would ba ramambarad, coma tha naxt alaction. This illustratas that tha govarnmant naads tha madia mora than tha madia naads tha govarnmant dua to tha fact tha madia has tha ability to shapa and form political discoursa. It is also capabla of disrupting tha astablishad paradigm, tharafora thraataning thair dominant status."
| |
|
The Media and Democracy, 2004.
A look at the use of mass media throughout the 20th century to promote democracy.
2,335 words (approx. 9.3 pages), 9 sources, MLA, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how the journalistic side of the 20th century can be defined as the struggle for democracy and an independent media against propaganda and subservience to the state. It looks at how that struggle culminated during the first half of this century in the seizure of the means of communication by the demagogues of the 1930s and 1940s, Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin, and their Cold War reincarnation of the 1950s, Joseph McCarthy, the ghost that still haunts U.S. journalism. It shows how modern journalism began around 1890 with the advent of a national system of communication and has had a pretty long run.
From the Paper
"The media has come under fire and censorship many a time for exposing the truth. Zambia's transition to multiparty politics in 1991 has not led to significant changes in state-media relations. The independent media is weak due to a hostile political and legal environment and severe economic conditions. The ability of the independent press to contribute effectively to democratic discourse is further constrained by its failure to live up to the professional role of the press in pluralist politics. (21) In Bangladesh government supporters seized hundreds of copies of the national newspaper, Janakantha because it had exposed a local officials involvement in drug smuggling."
| |
|
The Media and Democracy, 2002.
Discusses the current implications of the mass media on the emerging World Order and the concept of democracy.
2,900 words (approx. 11.6 pages), 11 sources, $ 106.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents a discussion of the mass media, the emerging world order and their prospects for democracy.
| |
|
Media and Democracy, 2007.
A discussion on whether the mass media enhances or diminishes the prospects of democracy in the United States.
792 words (approx. 3.2 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 28.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the role of the mass media. Specifically, it analyzes the theory that the media is a vital part of the democratic process in America. The paper suggests that media information provides vital information for decision making and the democratic process. It then discusses the opposing opinion also argued by theorists, that in fact the mass media impedes or obstructs the democratic process to a certain extent. The paper provides examples to illustrate both these sides of the argument.
From the Paper
"In conclusion the answer to the central question of whether the mass media enhances or diminishes the prospect of democracy in the United States must be ambiguous to a certain extent. On the one hand there is the important function that the mass media has of providing information that is useful and accessible to the general public. However, on the other hand there is the concern that has been growing in recent years that the Media, which is dependent on advertising revenue, can be manipulated and corrupted to certain ends. "It is impossible to separate the various media in advanced industrial countries from their enormous advertising base. The companies that provide the advertising revenues that now sustain most mass media have a stake in the established economic and political order. "(Gannaway) The suspicion therefore exists that that large institutions and companies may be a source of bias in the media. In America that can pervert or misdirect the democratic process."
| |
|
The Media in Western Democracies, 2005.
This paper discusses the role of the media in western democracies, specifically the combined cases of the United States, Canada, and Mexico.
2,250 words (approx. 9.0 pages), 9 sources, $ 89.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the complex relationship that exists between the media and the government in modern democratic societies. Specifically, the paper draws on the three examples of the United States, Canada, and Mexico. The paper examines the question of whether or not the media can be employed as an effective check against abuses of government power. The author concludes that this is not possible.
From the Paper
"What is the role that the media plays in keeping governments, especially democracies, free from corruption and oppression? Presumably, a free press is an integral and inseparable part of any democratic society. Many critics, both in and out of the government, believe that the role of responsible journalism is to expose government corruption, graft, and the like all the while reporting what is being done to eliminate such blemishes on modern democracies. The media, it is felt, should be a powerful force for cleaning up the government."
| |
|
Globalization and Democracy in Media, 2006.
A look at how globalization is effecting democracy in Canadian media.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 2 sources, $ 26.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Creating a culture of entertainment, advertisers are responsible for turning news into more of a commodity, enabling outlets to piggyback editorial content onto advertising sales through softer news relying more on celebrities, Hollywood blockbusters, food, and entertainment. This essay discusses in brief the effects of globalization on democracy in media in Canada.
From the Paper
"As Lorimer and Gasher argue, the first and foremost target of globalization is the mass media, creating a so-called "new media" bowing more exclusively to profit motive. With fewer investigative reports dedicated to protecting the consumer and society, this new and increasingly commercial model is driven by "its own internal logic," which essentially requires it to be driven (as opposed to supported) by advertisers (Lorimer and Gasher 278)."
| |
|
A Comparison of Modern Democracy and Classical Athenian Democracy, 2002.
Compares modern constitutional democracies and the democracy of classical Athens.
914 words (approx. 3.7 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Discusses the major differences between Athenian democracy and modern democracy. Differences include voting and citizenship rights, gender and background bias in the Athenian social and economic system, the type of representation that each society offered and the 'participation factor' in Athens.
From the Paper
"There are several significant differences between modern constitutional democracies and the democracy of classical Athens. Even though the classical Athenian democracy was a major step forward in political thought, at its height there were still many areas in which it was decidedly unlike any democracy existing today. These differences fall into three major categories: differences in who could vote, in the type of representation, and in the overall participation factor.
One major and clearly recognizable difference is that in the Athenian democracy there was only a certain selected element of the population that was allowed to vote. This difference in voting behavior stems from the fact that the Athenian social and economic system was supportive of the suppression of groups of people according to gender and background in ways that are not acceptable in today?s western cultures.
For example, women were not given full rights of citizenship. They were also socially and economically kept in a subservient role to men. Women?s function was seen as primarily that of propagation and managing a household. Women were not allowed access to the marketplace of ideas that was so important to the Athenians.
These conditions set up an interactive cycle between the social and political institutions; since women were regarded as inferior and not deserving of full citizenship, they were not allowed to vote. However, without the ability to vote, it was very unlikely that any of these restrictions would be modified or lifted. The role of women in Greek society was too firmly entrenched to be easily changed."
| |
|
A Comparison of Modern Democracy and Classical Athenian Democracy, 2002.
This paper looks at several significant differences between modern constitutional democracies and the democracy of classical Athens.
864 words (approx. 3.5 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The writer shows that even though the classical Athenian democracy was a major step forward in political thought, at its height there were still many areas in which it was decidedly unlike any democracy existing today. The paper divides these differences into three major categories: differences in who could vote, in the type of representation, and in the overall participation factor.
From the Paper
"One major and clearly recognizable difference is that in the Athenian democracy there was only a certain selected element of the population that was allowed to vote. This difference in voting behavior stems from the fact that the Athenian social and economic system was supportive of the suppression of groups of people according to gender and background in ways that are not acceptable in today?s western cultures."
| |
|
"Democracy?s Discontent" vs. "Democracy in America", 2003.
A comparison of Alexis de Tocqueville's "Democracy in America" and Michael J. Sandel's "Democracy?s Discontent".
3,845 words (approx. 15.4 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 105.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how Alexis de Tocqueville in "Democracy in America" and Michael J. Sandel in "Democracy?s Discontent" both address issues of democracy, freedom, the role of government, and the good citizen. It looks at how their viewpoints differ because they write at different times of history. De Tocqueville writes at a time when democracy is a novel ideal. Aristocracy has been the main form of government, and this, therefore, plays a major role in his writing. Sandel, on the other hand, deals with contemporary issues such as the global community and the implications of new technology and diminishing boundaries among people.
From the Paper
"De Tocqueville stresses the importance of civil equality in the achievement of true democracy. This equality implies the lack of divisions and barriers between social classes. This is the equality that he sees in American culture as opposed to European culture that still subscribes to the aristocratic means of government. The democratic ideal implies more freedom than would be possible with an aristocratic government: ?Let us suppose that all the people take a part in the government, and that each one of them has an equal right to take a part in it. As no one is different from his fellows, none can exercise a tyrannical power; men will be perfectly free because they are all entirely equal??(De Tocqueville, Book II, Chapter I)."
| |
|
Democracy and the U.S. Constitution: A Discussion of the Successes and Failures of the Founding Fathers in making an Obtainable Democracy, 2000.
After discussing the successes and failures of the founding fathers, the author of the paper concludes that they mostly did a good job, but disputes that America now has a pure democracy.
1,360 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 2 sources, $ 45.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
" A perfect democracy would be a democracy where everyone- the poor, the rich, the weak, the strong- get to have a say in what the government does. Wherein the supreme power ultimately rests with the people. However, this is not reality. Instead, representative democracy can be defined in two ways: the responsible model and the popular model. In the popular model, ordinary people have a great deal of freedom and ability to participate actively in government. In this type, elections express the popular will and determine policies. Examples of this model include the House of Representatives, the Virginia Plan, and citizen initiatives. In the responsible model, citizens play a more passive role. Government officials have a great deal of freedom to act on the behalf of the country as a whole. Elections here, grant popular consent and determine leaders. Examples of this model are the Senate, the New Jersey Plan, and the Supreme Court. Although the people of the United States live in a democracy that has both popular and responsible elements, democracy here has always been more denoted by the popular model. "
| |
|
The Mass Media, 2005.
This paper evaluates the mass media as a contributor to democracy.
2,125 words (approx. 8.5 pages), 10 sources, MLA, $ 66.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that the mass media is one of the most dominant and pervasive elements in American culture because the citizens' very attitudes, opinions, beliefs and values are greatly affected by the various media formats such as television, the internet, radio, newspapers and magazines. The author points out the reason that the media is so centrally and inseparably affiliated with democracy in the United States is because, in order for a government to be truly governed by the people, it is a prerequisite that the minds of the people are not controlled by some overriding force. The paper relates that existing factors, such as profitability goals, ownership of the media concentrated in the hands of a few and homogenousity in the range of issues, opinions and events presented, are dangerous to democracy.
From the Paper
"Another avenue by which the media facilitates the democratic process is by exposing individuals to the opinions, beliefs, and perspectives of others. In such a manner, individuals are made to look at a situation from a different vantage point which in turn may cause them to re-evaluate their own thinking. Be it the Civil Rights Movement, the Vietnam War, capital punishment, or abortion, the media gives us access to the thinking and reasoning of others. The media also operates and aids the democratic process by presenting issues in a concise and understandable manner. With the vast amount of information available, and the myriad number of happenings around the world, the media's ability to summarize, organize, and convey information is of utmost importance. If we were to receive raw information and data, without any media interference, most of us would be hard pressed to make sense out of the vast majority of issues at hand. Additionally, the media (or at least some avenue of the media) will tend to give virtually anyone the opportunity to speak their mind."
| |
|
Role of the Media, 2007.
A discussion of the important role of the media within a democracy.
892 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 31.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the role of the media as watchdogs and the impact that it has on democracy in the United States. The paper describes various films and how they show the impact that the media can have on educating the public. Finally, it discusses the media's role in exposing Congressman Mark Foley and the inappropriate e-mail contact he had with Congressional pages.
From the Paper
"Much concern has been expressed in recent years about media consolidation, creating larger and larger media entities and perhaps reducing the number of independent voices as a result (Campbell & Martin, 2007, Chapter 13). This consolidation has been supported by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which removed limits on media ownership and so allowed large companies in a given market to own more stations and more newspapers, showing again how Congress often favors business over the public interest. At the same time, though, the definition of "media" has expanded because of the Internet, with an explosion in websites, bloggers, traditional media sites online, and much more increasing the number of sources of information and, in many cases, serving as a watchdog not just on government but on the media itself."
| |
|
Mass Media and Politics, 2004.
Looks at the positive and negative implications of certain types of mass media on democracy in the United States.
2,451 words (approx. 9.8 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 74.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at the advantages and disadvantages of the "new media", such as the Internet and talk radio, for democratic governance in the U.S. Particular attention is paid to the concerns posed when the Internet is used as a medium for public response and feedback. The paper also considers whether mass media facilitate or hinder the democratic decision making process in the U.S.
From the Paper
"Mass medium has always functioned as the much-need link between the people and government in a democracy. The print media had been providing this link traditionally in the United States, until about 70 years ago, when President Roosevelt introduced the radio medium to connect directly and instantly with scores of Americans across the nation. In the 1960s, John F. Kennedy furthered this by effectively utilizing the power of television as a visual communications medium. Today, candidates and representatives of every political affiliation are tapping the power of the Internet to communicate and interact with citizens."
|
|
|
