i'm not great with english, and i was hopin there'd be somone who can comment on my frontline essay. any input would be fantastic. i know its a bit long and i need to cut it down, but having it planned out helps me to alter it to the question in the exam.
FRONTLINE
TELLING THE TRUTH
The truth is a construction of ‘reality’- someone always selects what is told and a text always, explicitly or implicitly, embodies a particular point of view. The question we ask, is how, in this information age that thrives on sensationalism, can we know what is a genuine attempt to tell the truth? The media plays an important role as the intermediary between many ‘real’ events throughout the world and the visions and versions the general populace comes to understand about them. To explore and understand this topic, lets look at some critical analysis of the media that presents us with their visions and versions of the truth.
The acclaimed ABC television series, Frontline, is a parody of current affairs programs, giving us ‘the story behind the story…behind the stories.’ An insight into the behind the scenes operations of the ratings obsessed world of the media, it takes a satirical look at the egos, the dubious practices and the hypocrisy of a medium that purports to objectively present public affairs. The fictional Frontline within Frontline, is represented through the filming techniques of clear, focused, professional filming ‘on-screen’, juxtaposed with jerky movements, fuzzy edges and hand-held recording of office life ‘off screen’. An insight into the typical characteristics of current news shows, the relentless pursuit of ratings, the means they devise to obtain a ‘scoop’, their obsession with image and, as a result, their lack of morality when it comes to telling the truth.
Episode, We Aint Got Dames addresses the manipulation of truth in an attempt to boost ratings with female viewers. Frontline’s vacuous host Mike Moore (Rob Sitch) is given an image promo that repackages him as warm and fuzzy, yet authoritative and in control, someone “all women of Australia can fall in love with.” The truth is humorously highlighted with the sustained contrast of Mike’s on-screen image and off screen reality. Mike, as the host, is a mediator of ‘the truth’, which is just as carefully pampered and presented as he is. This shows both that the media truth is about perception and not content, and that ratings drive what news is delivered and how it is presented (the need for female viewers determines the type of presentations). We are shown through the perversion of Mike’s sweatshop story into a fashion scoop, and by the dramatic re-enactment of the “dirty doctor” that the truth is sacrificed for drama. This technique of ‘re-enactment’ is also seen in Add Sex and Stir as a steamy connotative reenactment of a sports change-room, “An old current affairs recipe, you take any story, add sex and stir.” The ability of the crew to edit reports illustrates how the truth is easily manipulated for personal, professional or financial reasons, seen also in Add Sex as Brook rephrases her questions after the interview. Brian dubs the “dirty doctor” story (taken from an old magazine) as “the usual crap, tears on camera”, implying the news that is televised is overly dramatic and emotionally charged versions or creations of the truth. Truth can be coloured or altered by the language in which it is framed: clichés add drama, ‘a story no woman can afford to miss’, need to ‘stop and smell the roses.’ In this episode the audience only sees stories that will help the media reach its goals.
Playing the Ego Card looks at manipulation of the truth at the different levels: International (P.N.G helicopter scam), National, Corporate and Personal. Brian continually demands for “vision”, highlighting drama as more important than news. Mike responds from Bouganville in a poor attempt to create an atmosphere of attack. The fabricated images of Mike as a “fearless war correspondent” are juxtaposed with his fear of injections and whining about traveling business class. This image, alongside with Brooke’s promo ‘looks’, show that the image viewers see is orchestrated by the network and not by reality or truth. Again the truth of the story is second to drama, Brian makes it clear that it is not the story but the look of the story (national manipulation). This works as a satire of current events – issues in Baghdad, and is contrasted with the ‘real world’ events and the ‘behind the scenes’ operations. The manipulation of truth in media is mimicked ‘off-screen’ as Brian warms the egos of three employees in succession “Sales department’s over the moon. You made these ratings,” (personal manipulation) before proudly boasting his accomplishment to his employer (corporate). The emotionally charged language is again used to manipulate the truth: the rebels are “armed to the teeth” and the souvenir “spears are razor sharp” The satirical view of manipulation is perfectly summed up as Mike angrily warns “Don’t underestimate our viewers Brian!” Brian replies, “I’ve made a career out of it.”
J. Francis Davis article written for Media and Values, unweaves similar threads of truth that Frontline has so effectively satirized, analysing the images that media uses to form myths which are perceived as truths by the general public. Critically discussing the history of communication, he describes what images are, or have become in our modern day context, as Brian from Frontline says “A pub brawl in Manly is better than a massacre of millions if you’ve got the pictures.” Objectively exposing myths he shows the ways in which we can be wise towards sensationalism “among all the media messages that daily bombard us.” Without a clear understanding of the difference between the media’s representation of the truth (their manipulation of images) and the real truth, our minds and our thoughts are subject to their control. His conversational, colloquial tone, yet structured layout allows us as responders to relate as fellow consumers, yet accept facts from this esteemed and educated media insider.
Maree Curtis’ interview with Chinese author Zhou Wei Hui (Sunday Telegraph , 28.08.04) describes how Hui’s country is in outrage at the image that her novels, particularly her latest, Shanghai Baby, have generated of the true contemporary China and its’ government system. Her novel reveals the nitty-gritty underbelly of modern-day Shanghai, a world that is “not so different from the West”. But the Government will not forsake the perfect ‘travel-brochure’ image, that they have worked so hard to portray. Their power to control has resulted in Hui’s books being banned all over China.
The episodes of Frontline have effectively satirized the media’s representation and misrepresentation of truth, which as Davis article describes, “have become a substitute for the search of meaning”. They succeeded in proving that the media often does, and has the power to, misrepresent, manipulate, sensationalize or construct the truth for their own benefit. And, through author Hui’s failed attempt to represent the truth about her country, we are shown here that the media is selectively controlled by particular dominating entities – The Government, for us major media owners such as the Murdoch and Packer families. In other words, those in power, have the power to control truth.
Boris Pastornak said “What is laid down, ordered, factual, is never enough to embrace the whole truth; life always spills over the rim of every cup.” Does anyone tell the truth anymore? Yes. What is the truth? It is a construction of ‘reality’- someone always, explicitly or implicitly, embodies a particular point of view. It is left to our discretion, to differentiate between fiction and fact, between the truth in the cup, and the little extras that spill over the rim.
FRONTLINE
TELLING THE TRUTH
The truth is a construction of ‘reality’- someone always selects what is told and a text always, explicitly or implicitly, embodies a particular point of view. The question we ask, is how, in this information age that thrives on sensationalism, can we know what is a genuine attempt to tell the truth? The media plays an important role as the intermediary between many ‘real’ events throughout the world and the visions and versions the general populace comes to understand about them. To explore and understand this topic, lets look at some critical analysis of the media that presents us with their visions and versions of the truth.
The acclaimed ABC television series, Frontline, is a parody of current affairs programs, giving us ‘the story behind the story…behind the stories.’ An insight into the behind the scenes operations of the ratings obsessed world of the media, it takes a satirical look at the egos, the dubious practices and the hypocrisy of a medium that purports to objectively present public affairs. The fictional Frontline within Frontline, is represented through the filming techniques of clear, focused, professional filming ‘on-screen’, juxtaposed with jerky movements, fuzzy edges and hand-held recording of office life ‘off screen’. An insight into the typical characteristics of current news shows, the relentless pursuit of ratings, the means they devise to obtain a ‘scoop’, their obsession with image and, as a result, their lack of morality when it comes to telling the truth.
Episode, We Aint Got Dames addresses the manipulation of truth in an attempt to boost ratings with female viewers. Frontline’s vacuous host Mike Moore (Rob Sitch) is given an image promo that repackages him as warm and fuzzy, yet authoritative and in control, someone “all women of Australia can fall in love with.” The truth is humorously highlighted with the sustained contrast of Mike’s on-screen image and off screen reality. Mike, as the host, is a mediator of ‘the truth’, which is just as carefully pampered and presented as he is. This shows both that the media truth is about perception and not content, and that ratings drive what news is delivered and how it is presented (the need for female viewers determines the type of presentations). We are shown through the perversion of Mike’s sweatshop story into a fashion scoop, and by the dramatic re-enactment of the “dirty doctor” that the truth is sacrificed for drama. This technique of ‘re-enactment’ is also seen in Add Sex and Stir as a steamy connotative reenactment of a sports change-room, “An old current affairs recipe, you take any story, add sex and stir.” The ability of the crew to edit reports illustrates how the truth is easily manipulated for personal, professional or financial reasons, seen also in Add Sex as Brook rephrases her questions after the interview. Brian dubs the “dirty doctor” story (taken from an old magazine) as “the usual crap, tears on camera”, implying the news that is televised is overly dramatic and emotionally charged versions or creations of the truth. Truth can be coloured or altered by the language in which it is framed: clichés add drama, ‘a story no woman can afford to miss’, need to ‘stop and smell the roses.’ In this episode the audience only sees stories that will help the media reach its goals.
Playing the Ego Card looks at manipulation of the truth at the different levels: International (P.N.G helicopter scam), National, Corporate and Personal. Brian continually demands for “vision”, highlighting drama as more important than news. Mike responds from Bouganville in a poor attempt to create an atmosphere of attack. The fabricated images of Mike as a “fearless war correspondent” are juxtaposed with his fear of injections and whining about traveling business class. This image, alongside with Brooke’s promo ‘looks’, show that the image viewers see is orchestrated by the network and not by reality or truth. Again the truth of the story is second to drama, Brian makes it clear that it is not the story but the look of the story (national manipulation). This works as a satire of current events – issues in Baghdad, and is contrasted with the ‘real world’ events and the ‘behind the scenes’ operations. The manipulation of truth in media is mimicked ‘off-screen’ as Brian warms the egos of three employees in succession “Sales department’s over the moon. You made these ratings,” (personal manipulation) before proudly boasting his accomplishment to his employer (corporate). The emotionally charged language is again used to manipulate the truth: the rebels are “armed to the teeth” and the souvenir “spears are razor sharp” The satirical view of manipulation is perfectly summed up as Mike angrily warns “Don’t underestimate our viewers Brian!” Brian replies, “I’ve made a career out of it.”
J. Francis Davis article written for Media and Values, unweaves similar threads of truth that Frontline has so effectively satirized, analysing the images that media uses to form myths which are perceived as truths by the general public. Critically discussing the history of communication, he describes what images are, or have become in our modern day context, as Brian from Frontline says “A pub brawl in Manly is better than a massacre of millions if you’ve got the pictures.” Objectively exposing myths he shows the ways in which we can be wise towards sensationalism “among all the media messages that daily bombard us.” Without a clear understanding of the difference between the media’s representation of the truth (their manipulation of images) and the real truth, our minds and our thoughts are subject to their control. His conversational, colloquial tone, yet structured layout allows us as responders to relate as fellow consumers, yet accept facts from this esteemed and educated media insider.
Maree Curtis’ interview with Chinese author Zhou Wei Hui (Sunday Telegraph , 28.08.04) describes how Hui’s country is in outrage at the image that her novels, particularly her latest, Shanghai Baby, have generated of the true contemporary China and its’ government system. Her novel reveals the nitty-gritty underbelly of modern-day Shanghai, a world that is “not so different from the West”. But the Government will not forsake the perfect ‘travel-brochure’ image, that they have worked so hard to portray. Their power to control has resulted in Hui’s books being banned all over China.
The episodes of Frontline have effectively satirized the media’s representation and misrepresentation of truth, which as Davis article describes, “have become a substitute for the search of meaning”. They succeeded in proving that the media often does, and has the power to, misrepresent, manipulate, sensationalize or construct the truth for their own benefit. And, through author Hui’s failed attempt to represent the truth about her country, we are shown here that the media is selectively controlled by particular dominating entities – The Government, for us major media owners such as the Murdoch and Packer families. In other words, those in power, have the power to control truth.
Boris Pastornak said “What is laid down, ordered, factual, is never enough to embrace the whole truth; life always spills over the rim of every cup.” Does anyone tell the truth anymore? Yes. What is the truth? It is a construction of ‘reality’- someone always, explicitly or implicitly, embodies a particular point of view. It is left to our discretion, to differentiate between fiction and fact, between the truth in the cup, and the little extras that spill over the rim.
Last edited:
