When I first read Manufacturing Consent, I didn’t expect to be upset. I thought, “Of course the media is biassed, but this sounds bad.” As I read, what stood out to me was how the authors say the biases are not just random mistakes in reporting, but are built into the way we get information.
Chomsky and Herman talk about the propaganda model, which shows how five filters change news in the mass media. The filters are media ownership, advertising as the main source of income, reliance on official sources, the threat of “flak” or pressure on media outlets, and an ideological filter. I thought their point that journalists aren’t always bad or dishonest was strong. They work in systems that favour some voices, leave others out, and reward people who follow the rules. For example, big media companies are less likely to report stories that go against the interests of their advertisers or official sources. The book made me think about how I use the media in a “human” way. I thought about how often we get the whole story instead of a short version that is meant to get the most attention or cause the least amount of trouble for business as usual. This seems even more important now that streaming and social media are so popular. Chomsky himself says that the model needs to be changed to work with the internet.
It also made me think about consent—how we give our consent to stories by trusting them, clicking on them, sharing them, and believing them. The title of the book is interesting: “manufacturing consent” isn’t just about what the media tells us to think; it’s also about what we accept as normal. That’s scary, but it also gives us more power: we can be more aware, more sceptical, and more involved.
In the end, Manufacturing Consent isn’t a fun book to read, but it’s an important one. It makes us think about who chooses the news we get. What isn’t included? What do we think when we say “that’s just the news”? And maybe most importantly, what would we do if we didn’t just believe what we were told?
I like your points about journalists, and how they work within constraints that can shape their reporting. You explained the five filters well, and I like how you added your own opinions and insight into the post, alongside the questions for the audience in the conclusion. I think you could go into more detail, maybe finding a specific news article or example to go into depth on, as your blog posit is quite general currently.